OC Apologist - On Christ Apologetics

Vocations - Veterans Day

2011-11-10T11:28:00.000-08:00

Whenever, Veterans' Day rolls around, I am reminded of vocations (callings in our lives) and how God works through all vocations. A proper understanding of vocations helps remind me of how God works through the military of our country to do his work in the world, as well as other country's militaries. know that some Christians oppose Christian involvement in any military. I think they lack a proper understanding of vocations. As an apologetic for the military being a vocation (calling) from God, and how Christians can faithfully serve in a military vocation, I have some quotes from Martin Luther on vocation. They were taken from: http://trinitypartners.org/2010/07/04/luther-on-vocation/

"A cobbler, a smith, a farmer, each has the work and office of his trade, and yet they are all alike consecrated priests and bishops, and every one by means of his own work or office must benefit and serve every other, that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, even as all the members of the body serve one another…”

“What you do in your house is worth as much as if you did it up in heaven for our Lord God…We should accustom ourselves to think of our position and work as sacred and well-pleasing to God, not on account of the position and work, but on account of the word and faith from which the obedience and the work flow”

“Monastic vows rest on the false assumption that there is a special calling, a vocation, to which superior Christians are invited to observe the counsels of perfection while ordinary Christians fulfil only the commands; but there simply is no special religious vocation since the call of God comes to each at the common tasks.”

“The idea that the service to God should have only to do with a church altar, singing, reading, sacrifice, and the like is without doubt but the worst trick of the devil. How could the devil have led us more effectively astray than by the narrow conception that service to God takes place only in a church and by the works done therein…The whole world could abound with the services to the Lord, Gottesdienste – not only in churches but also in the home, kitchen, workshop, field”

God bless you Veterans this Veterans Day Weekend!

You will die! - One approach to Christian apologetics.

2011-09-29T07:42:00.000-07:00

Dear readers, whoever you are.

This isn't exactly what one usually would consider when they think of defending the Christian faith; the statement, "You will die." It's not pretty. It's not nice. We try not to think about it. We try to push death out of our minds. That's why they call them casualties and not deaths! That's why they call them viruses, or the bird flu, or the swine flu, and not plagues! We don't want to think about death!

To quote the Black Sabbath song, "After Forever," "When you think about death do you keep your cool?"

Well to quote the song more, "I'll be prepared when you're lonely and scared at the end of our days." The answer in that song by Black Sabbaath of course is "Jesus Christ is the only way to love."

I know a pastor who sets up shop at UCLA. He shares the good news of salvation with people. However, if a person rejects the news. If they are complacent, if they are ambivalent, he challenges them to consider the alternatives... what if there is no God, then you die and you are in the ground. What if there is a God? And you have rejected him? What if that God is Jesus? What then? Are you so sure... do you keep your cool when you think about death?

He told one student, "Well, just remember you are going to die." And the student left the conversation at that, but came back to him a month later and said, "Do you remember the last thing you said to me?" The pastor did not. The student said it had troubled him ever sense talking to the pastor. He finally came face to face with his own personal death, and was he so sure... was he so certain that he would be reincarnated as his faith taught. The pastor shared, Jesus will save you from that death if you trust in him and turn to him for salvation.

Part of apologetics is just properly explaining the Christian faith, and God's Word can be divided into two camps, Law, and Gospel. God's Law shows us that we are sinners, that God's wrath is upon us and that we justly deserve his eternal punishment. God's Gospel shows us our savior. To learn more about Law and Gospel, click on the "What's in the Bible?" link at the top, left of this blog page and then click on the Law and Gospel article.

So, you will die. Worried? Well, maybe you shouldn't be complacent? Don't put off considering what lies beyond this life. To be fair, I'll say look to all religions, but I'd recommend looking to Christianity first, and say this because it is objective, read 1 Corinthians 15 to know what I mean.

Defending Hell #4

2011-09-21T08:43:00.000-07:00

In Rob Bell's book, Love Wins, he presents the belief that hell is here on earth. Hell is the pain and suffering, here, now. This isn't a new idea that Bell is presenting.

For example, here is a video of Ronnie James Dio talking about his views on religion, and in particularly, heaven and hell, since the name the first Black Sabbath album he was singer for was entitled, Heaven and Hell. In this video, he explains what heaven and hell both mean to him in that song...

The answer to the existence of heaven and hell, however, shouldn't be based on the beliefs of a rock singer, or any human for that matter. How can any of us know for certain what lies after death... unless that has been revealed to us by God.

We need to be careful to not let our own feelings and thoughts get in the way of what God has revealed to us in his Word. What does God's Word say about the existence of hell?

Matthew 10:28 says, "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the one who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

A clear reading of this passage, indicates that the soul goes on after the death of the body. In fact, there is the indication that the soul will be reunited with the body in the future and both will be in hell.

This of course is not good news. This is God's law that brings wrath and judgment. However, there is freedom from sin, death, devil, and hell. If you don't know John 3:16, please look it up. If you have doubts about God's Word, look through this blog, look through the articles connected to the "What's in the Bible?" and the "Why Believe the Bible?" links at the top left of this blog.

What I have Learned from Alice Cooper #1

2011-09-18T20:14:00.000-07:00

I was in Best Buy yesterday evening, and I was shocked to see that Alice Cooper has a new nightmare. A long, long time ago, 35 years is what I'm reading on the Internet, Alice released the album, Welcome to my Nightmare! Now, the revisit to his nightmare is entitled, Welcome 2 my Nightmare.

How does this fit with apologetics? I could go several routes...

1. I could talk about defending the faith, by defending our hearts. Will listening to Cooper, lead Christians away from Jesus. Short answer: Maybe. Depends on the Christian.

or

2. The Alice Cooper is a Christian route. Yet, how does that fit into Christian apologetics?

I'm going with route two, by quoting Alice!

Despite maintaining his rocker, horror style, of which an entire maze has been created based on Cooper's music at this year's Universal Studios Night of Horror for Halloween, Cooper says, "My life is dedicated to follow Christ."

However, he has purposefully kept from becoming known for being a Christian! He says, the focus should be on Christ and not on Alice, a rock singer who can't save anyone.

Yet...

Alice says, "I've had a couple of people that were friends of mine that I've talked to that have vocally said they have [accepted Christ]. I have talked to some big stars about this, some really horrific characters ... and you'd be surprised. The ones that you would think are the furthest gone are the ones that are more apt to listen."

This is the first connection to Christian apologetics I want to make. Alice spoke with his friends, and other stars that he has had connection with through his profession. I think Christians are certainly called to sow seed, to spread the Gospel, but at the same time, we can lose a lot of time by going around and around in circles (arguing if you will) with people who are far, far, far from listening to the message of Christ. Cooper reminds me of who is the most likely to listen - who to spend time with sharing the Gospel - the horrific characters. The religious and those who got their act together in their own mind, likely won't listen, because to them, they don't need Christ. Jesus spoke of fertile soil to receive the word of the Gospel - the people we think are the furthest gone, are likely the ones whose hearts are made up of fertile soil. They've been tilled through the hard knocks of their own sinful actions and the persecution of the "righteous" that they are open to listen to the message of unbiased, unconditional love that comes through Jesus.

Humans and Dinosaurs #3

2011-09-15T08:19:00.000-07:00

If God created all sea, air, and land creatures on the fifth and sixth days of creation, with humans being created on the sixth day also, then yes, humans and dinosaurs coexisted at one point in history. I say this because the penalty for eating the forbidden fruit in the garden was death. Romans 5 says that "Just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned." My reading of Romans 8:19-25 indicates that the death that occurred in men after the fall also fell upon all of creation. All of creation was subjected to frustration as a result of Adam. I don't believe Scripture teaches death before the Fall, if you know verses that teach this, please let me know.

As long as men and dinosaurs coexisted, wouldn't there be evidence of their coexistence?

Let's take a look at one example. The Lindworm! The Lindworm is found within Eurpoean mythology.

Were Lindworms real? Would they classify as dinosaurs today?

Historically, Marco Polo, reported seeing Lindworms in Central Asia. Here's the quote from Marco Polo:

.. snakes and great serpents of such vast size as to strike fear into those who see them, and so hideous that the very account of them must excite the wonder of those to hear it. ... You may be assured that some of them are ten paces in length; some are more and some less. And in bulk they are equal to a great cask, for the bigger ones are about ten palms in girth. They have two forelegs near the head, but for foot nothing but a claw like the claw of a hawk or that of a lion. The head is very big, and the eyes are bigger than a great loaf of bread. The mouth is large enough to swallow a man whole, and is garnished with great [pointed] teeth. And in short they are so fierce-looking and so hideously ugly, that every man and beast must stand in fear and trembling of them. There are also smaller ones, such as of eight paces long, and of five, and of one pace only. (The Travels of Marco Polo, Ch. XLIX)

To read the entre chapter from The Travels of Marco Polo, click here. He goes into detail on how they are caught and how they are very valuable, because they are used in making a medicine - very much a part of Traditional Chinese Medicine.
There is a lot more present on the Lindworm at the following sites:

http://www.monstropedia.org/index.php?title=Lindworm
http://www.book-of-thoth.com/thebook/index.php/Lindworm
http://dragonsinn.net/fict-lindworm.htm
These sites aren't well cited, but I'm sure that if you search for the specific details within these sites you will be able to find historical citations. At least I posted the Marco Polo quote.

Is the Lindwurm evidence of dinosaurs existing with humans? What do you think?

Human and Dinosaurs #2 -The London Hammer

2011-09-14T08:23:00.000-07:00

What would it mean if a hammer was found in a layer of rock that ordinarily would be dated at the time of the dinosaurs? Would that mean dinosaurs, grafted hammers. Does anyone remember the show Dinosaurs. According that show's fantasy, they did. If I remember correctly, the father dinosaur in that show was a construction worker.

If you don't know what I'm talking about there is a hammer called "The Hammer" or the "The London Hammer". It has this name because it was found in London, Texas. The hammer is from the Cretaceous time period - a time when human evidence should not exists according to Darwinian theory. Of course some, people claim that this hammer, isn't actually from Cretaceous rock, such as the following two writers:

http://www.badarchaeology.com/?page_id=315
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/hammer.htm

However, some sites, take a different approach to this artifact:

The following site lists it as an unexplained and unsolved mystery of the world. Adding to the mystery, this site says that "the quality of the iron equals or exceeds the quality of any iron found in the modern world." Wow! What would that mean? Check out the summary of this artifact from Mysteries of the World (of course they also have information about aliens...): http://unexplainedmysteriesoftheworld.com/archives/the-mystery-of-the-london-artifact

"The Hammer" even hit ZME's "Ten Most Amazing Unexplained Artifacts." From their write up, we hear that there was a team that dated the hammer to be way older than the rock formation it was discovered. This definitely would mean people co-inhabited with dinosaurs. Here's a quote from their site, "A team of archaeologists checked it, and as it turns out, the rock encasing the hammer was dated back more than 400 million year; the hammer itself turned out to be more than 500 million years old. Additionally, a section of the handle has begun the transformation to coal. Creationists, of course, were all over this. The hammer’s head, made of more than 96% iron, is far more pure than anything nature could have achieved without an assist from modern technology." Read more: http://www.zmescience.com/other/most-amazing-unexplained-artifacts/#ixzz1XwaHASzl

Here is information about the hammer from the museum that houses the artifact: Creation Evidence Museum.

What do you make of this? Who do you trust? And why?

Humans and Dinosaurs #1

2011-09-09T20:59:00.000-07:00

It's a hot topic now in my classroom; did people and dinosaurs exist at the same time? This question has been asked in a couple of different classes in the past week.

Matt Damon would say if you think people and dinosaurs ever coexisted, you shouldn't be qualified to be president of the United States of America (near the end of the following video).

Here's one reason why dinosaurs likely are not as old as many scientists claim (230 million years old according to this site). Did you know that red blood cells were found within dinosaur bones? Most scientists upon hearing this would think this is improbable, that the findings must be wrong! Why? Because there is no way that red blood cells could be preserved for millions of years. There's no way they wouldn't have decayed. The known laws and functions of science would lead them to believe they must have been decayed. To make matters even more interesting, soft bone tissue has also been found within a T-rex bone! Again, what? How is this possible?

Watch the full episode. See more NOVA scienceNOW.

It's funny that when this was discovered, scientists began to think about the possibility of finding DNA and then cloning dinosaurs, just like in Jurassic Park! Really, that's the first thing that came to mind. Why wouldn't it come to mind that this evidence shows that dinosaurs aren't as long extinct as previously thought? Why isn't this being addressed.

Jurassic Park - Here we come!

Again, if the bones are millions of years old, you would expect there to be no red blood cells, no soft tissue present. It would have decayed and become hard minerals. But it hasn't. Please note, the source for this is PBS! I didn't quote from a Christian website.

Defending Hell #3

2011-09-08T08:02:00.000-07:00

Defending hell is a strange title for a blog post. But from my perspective, hell is under attack. A large number of Christians and non-Christians question the existence of hell. And ultimately in questing the existence of hell, the existence of God is being questioned, as well as the significance of Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross! An apologetic for hell is sadly necessary.

One objection to the existence of hell is its duration. Eternity? Isn't that too long of a punishment? Wouldn't an all-loving, merciful God believe in remediation, and not eternal condemnation? No second-chance?

Let's first admit that if you believe there might be a hell and there might be a God, that God if he was able to create all things, must be greater than us. His ways, thoughts, and actions must function on a higher plain than that of humanity. When we start with that notion, we have to admit that God is soverign and if I don't understand his judgment against sin, it doesn't really matter.

I also believe that from our experiences in life, we are given the ability to at least reasonable understand how God could justify eternal condemnation of hell. Let's consider our own prison systems. If someone outright intentionally, murders someone we would expect them to receive a death sentence - here life in prison, or a trip down death row. If someone rapes someone, we likely would also wish for a life sentence, although we know rapists get way less and when released are often times repeat offenders. If someone who murdered someone gets off the hook - he cry foul! We desire justice and we desire tat the punishment fits the crime.

How long would it take to murder someone? One gunshot - dead. Murder can be instantaneous. But how long is the penalty? Much, much longer. For a one second crime - one moment of stupidity, or anger, a person receives a life time of punishment. How is that fair? It's fair because a life was taken, and the only way to repay a life is to lose your life.

Now think about hell? Who is the crime against? Sins are committed against God. If a person lives for 30 years, that's thirty years of sinning against God. As great a value as human life has, the value of the life of God is much greater! So for a one second - three minute crime committed against a human, a lifelong sentence can be expected in many cases. For lifelong crimes committed against God - how long should the crime be?

Also, if we think about the exchange that is weighed out in penalties - a life for a life, we should consider that God is eternal. An entire sinful life against God - wouldn't an eternal penalty fit the crime?

But, the love of God objection is usually thrown out here. I would have to say the love of God justifies the penalty of hell. God Father had his Son, Jesus Christ, brutally executed by the hands of his creation. Jesus Christ on the cross, suffered the eternal penalty of hell - that doesn't make sense to me, but God is outside of time and it is possible for him to somehow suffer hell in a three hour time span. If God the Father is willing to allow his son to serve as a substitute for us, and if Jesus Christ, his son, is willing to suffer hell for us, so we won't have to experience hell - isn't that the greatest love of all? If he experienced hell, even though he was innocent, so we who are guilty won't have to experience hell, how can we truly object to God sentencing sinners who have rejected him from the punishment of eternal hell?

I still don't get hell - I still don't like it, and I definitely don't want anyone to suffer it, just as God doesn't evidenced through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, but my personal likes and dislikes have to be submissive and obedient to the will of God and his Word.

Defending Hell #2

2011-09-06T19:24:00.000-07:00

In today's American culture, it has become, at least in my opinion, politically incorrect to say someone's religion is wrong. When it comes to religious beliefs, the spirit of the age seems to encourage a relative approach - it's all good, as long as it's good for you and it doesn't harm others and you are respectful of others' beliefs. Respect, however, seems to be more than just showing care and a whimsical approach to sharing one's beliefs with another, respect is not saying someone else is wrong. It's not claiming that your faith is exclusively true - bad news for any exclusive religion, including Islam.

The result of this spirit of the age is that even within Christian circles, there is a doubt of the existence of hell. It's become the view that love means being accepting of all ideologies, political viewpoints, religions, sexual orientations, and etc. The thought goes, "If we can be so loving and open to accept and cherish everyone regardless of personal differences, then God should be that loving too! An all-loving God, if he exists, wouldn't send someone to hell, because their beliefs didn't align with his." It really shows, that we think we know more about love than God. It shows that we think we know more about justice than he does. How arrogant is that? Our words, our thoughts, our beliefs, cannot trump those of God expressed in his Word.

Some Christians have jumped on the universal salvation bandwagon. They still claim that salvation is through Jesus, and through faith, but they allow an opportunity after death for people to come to faith in Christ! Is this in Scripture anywhere? Christian universalism is of course grounded in a right heart position, that no one should perish and suffer hell, which by the way is God's heart position too, in his moral will. But in his decreed will, God allows for us to be morally free agents. He isn't the puppet master of our souls - forcing us into a relationship with us. So in his decreed will, he allows for humanity to reject him - to mock him - to spit on him - to trample him underfoot. The major flipside to this is that it means God's righteous judgment upon the people who reject him. The upshot of course is that for those who have accepted him, it wasn't forced, it's a true love relationship with the Master of the Universe!

When this life is over, where do you want to stand on man's word, or God's. I'd like to cite some of the verses which Bill Wiese lists in his book which show the existence of hell within the pages of the Bible.

Appointed or Assigned

Luke 12:46
Revelation 21:8

Body in Hell

Proverbs 1:12
Matthew 10:28

Darkness

Job 33:28-30
Matthew 8:12
2 Peter 2:4-17

Destruction

Job 21:30
Matthew 23:33
2 Thessolonians 1:9

Eternal Separation

Proverbs 15:29
2 Thessalonians 1:9

Hell

Psalm 55:15
Matthew 16:18
Revelatoin 20:14

These are just a few of the verses, and I mean just a few, which Bill Wiese cites in his book. For the full list, check out his book 23 Minutes in Hell. Also check out his book, Hell: Separate Truth from Fiction and Get Your Toughest Questions Answered

Defending Hell? #1

2011-08-24T13:49:00.000-07:00

It may come as a shock, but there is a need for an apologetic on hell. Seriously.

Read the following page for more information: Pew's Hell Survey. According to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, conducted in 2007, only 59% of Americans believe in the existence of Hell.

Proving hell's existence to someone who isn't a Christian, is next to impossible. How would you do it since hell is only experienced after death, unless of course, God gives someone a vision of hell and the person recognizes the vision was from God and puts trust in that vision?

The need for defending the existence of hell isn't necessary for the unbeliever, it's necessary for believers. Read the link to "Pew's Hell Survey" and the percentages given indicate that there must be Christians who do not believe in the existence of hell! From personal experience, I have heard Christians question the existence of hell based on the existence of an all-loving God. Think Rob Bell's book, Love Wins. Ultimately, the problem lies in our over-emphasis of certain characteristics of God. We over focus on God's love and mercy, and we ignore or erase God's nature to be just and holy! We forget that grace, although it is free, is not cheap! Grace is very, very costly to God.

G - od's
R - iches
A - t
C - hrist's
E - xpense

Here are some books on hell: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/august/5booksonhell.html

Selling Truth for Unity #1

2011-08-20T10:42:00.000-07:00

From Charles Colson's article, "As Long as we get Along: Selling Truth for Unity":

He quotes Bishop Lee who said, "If you must make a choice between heresy and schism, always choose heresy."

Colson can't think of anything more dangerous. He explains that this is basically saying, "we can tolerate anything within the church just to keep the church together." This reminds me of Paul when he addressed the Corinthians about the man they knew was sleeping with his father's wife. They allowed it to happen! We can't allow and tolerate open sin in order to avoid conflict or schism within the church. In the case of Bishop Lee that was tolerating an openly gay man as a bishop in the Episcopal Church. Doing so would be avoiding the prerequisites of a church leader laid out by Paul in his pastoral epistles given to Paul and Titus, as well as clear writings about the sinfulness of homosexuality and other sinful actions in Romans 1. Paul also had to take such stands against false doctrines and teachers within the church. Think the Judaizers and Gnostics of his day.

Colson gives two reasons that so many Christians are selling truth for unity! The first is money. He says, "There is a lot at stake economically!" If a church becomes split, who is going to pay for the pastor's salary and retirement? Who is going to pay for the congregation's building loans? Will someone's reputation be hurt? The second reason he gives is that American Christians no longer take truth seriously! As a result, we tend to think that all people of good will are "basically on the same side."

I've met many college students at UCI who believe that we're basically good and following the same path. Some of these students grew up in the Christian church and have fallen away to religious pluralism and universalism. Many take the stance that we cannot know the truth in any situation - even morality! Everything is subjective and relative with personal preference being the guide and norm of our lives. How dangerous is that? Well, that's what you get when you shoot for unity above truth.

Colson concludes his article by saying, "It's all well and good for evangelicals to sit around and talk about "those crazy Episcapalians." But they're just reflecting what all of us do to a lesser degree. Lee's words ought to be a sobering wake up call to all of us."

What is evil?

2011-05-30T14:49:00.000-07:00

Everyone struggles with evil. Everyone has been wronged, cheated, or hurt. Everyone has wronged, cheated, or hurt someone else. Evil is guaranteed to be an aspect of human life.

But what exactly is evil? Is evil a substance? Is it tangible? Can we lay hold of it, and lift it up in our hands and say, "Here it is! Here is evil!"?

The answer of course is no, and I think everyone would agree on this too.

So what is evil, if it's not a "stuff?"

Blindness is a lack of sight. A tooth cavity isn't a thing either, it's also a lack of something, a lack of enamel. Likewise evil is a lack of something; it's a lack of goodness in the will of a creature.

Defining evil in this manner can be a good Christian apologetic tool, because it shows that evil did not originate with God. God created the world and its creatures "good." Evil is a lack of goodness in the will of humanity. So think of the cavity, a hole in a tooth, a lack of enamel; that's what evil is like, a hole in humanities' will, a lack of the goodness within man.

This way of defining evil is also useful because it makes the existence of evil dependent on the existence of good. Also, how can we have a good or evil unless there is an absolute good with which to measure goodness? If there isn't a transcendent God, then all goodness and evil is merely subjective. All we have is humans judging each others' morals. To even begin to speak of evil, there must be good, and there must be God.

Of course, this definition falls short with the Bible's explanation of sin and evil. Evil is much more active than a lack of goodness. It's more than an inactive hole. Our sinful nature is described as being active and waging war against our souls. Despite its shortcomings in this area, using this definition of evil can still proof to be a helpful apologetic tool for the Christian.

Is it Ok for Christians to Have Doubts?

2011-05-27T09:27:00.000-07:00

A student of mine wanted to write an apologetics paper on the role or place of doubts in the life of a Christian. He wanted to find an answer to the question, "Is it OK for Christians to have Doubts?"

His conclusion after reading non-Christian and Christian sources was that one will still be saved even if that person doubts his or her salvation in Christ.

Here were his arguments:

1. Doubting your salvation is actually good! Doubting leads one to grow spiritually and intellectually, because a doubter will want to know the answer for the doubt, and through the research can increase trust or connection with the subject he or she had doubt. For Scriptural support, he cited 2 Cor. 13:5.

2. There is no reason to doubt your salvation. Doubts show a lack of understanding, but God has revealed all that we need to know for our salvation. "These things I have written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may believe on the name of the Son of God" (1 John 5:13).

3. Salvation is important to any religion and every religion includes doubts as an important step to reach their goals. Overcoming doubt in Hinduism is an important step to reaching moksha. Buddhism calls for believers to overcome their religious doubts. His conclusion here was, "It is important to know how other religions take care of this problem because by knowing those religions, one can increase interactions with other religious beleivers and convince them to become Christian since it is easier for people to move towards Christ if they know that they can still have doubts and be a Christian." It thought this was an interesting point. Other religions require a person to overcome doubts for salvation. Christianity allows a believer to still have doubts. It's a more inviting offer.

4. God will always love you and tries to save you even if you are unfaithful to Him. 2 Timothy 2:13 says, "If we are faithless, he [God] remains faithful - for he cannot deny himself." Luke 11:10 says, "For everyone who asks, receives; and he who seeks, finds; and to him who knocks, it shall be opened." The student concluding this point by quoting John 3:16 and saying, "Even though we have sinned too much that we should be eternally separated from Him and put to death, He still saved us and took our punishment upon himself."

The final conclusion was "you will still be saved even if you doubt your salvation as doubting is an integral part of growing faith in God and trust in the Bible, which is the only source that answers questions beyond our natural knowledge. This student also stated that this research has "made it easier for me to invite more people to Christ because Christianity is the only religion that only requires faith for salvation, while still allowing a person to be saved even if they have doubts."

I'll keep the student's name anonymous, but I'd also like to share that he is a Japanese international student.

Are we Good?

2011-05-25T08:07:00.000-07:00

This is a video entitled, "Are we Good?", posted by One Minute Apologist.

I meet pluralists, deists, atheists, and agnostics a lot who on the UCI's campus who have this notion that all that matters in this life is being "good." They usually don't have a problem with us being on UCI's campus sharing our Christian faith, well mostly because we're handing out free coffee, but also because they think it's all "good" what we're doing, as long it makes us better, more loving people. Just last night someone shared that "all the religions are basically 99% the same, they promote good morals and ethics!" I agreed that all religions had a moral code of conduct, but that divine redemption within Christianity was a big difference. I've even met people who claim to be Christians and Muslims who have boiled life done to just being good, and God will save those who are good.

These conversations really made me interested in knowing what One-Minute had to share on this topic, since a lot of my conversations are short and in passing as people get a Cup of Joe.

I'm slightly disappointed in the video, but how can I be when my last post was advocating, the simple, straight-forward sharing of Law and Gospel as a great witnessing and apologetic tool. So if you want deep and profound answers, don't look to this video. If you want to hear what the Bible says on this issue, go no further.

I personally liked this comment I saw shared on this video, "If you made something and didn't like it, you'd throw it in the trash and make something new. but God offered us a way to be redeemed through Jesus Christ. Jesus bless you." Yes!!! Love it.

Alright, so I'd love to get feedback on how you would respond to the "Are we Good?" question, or the "We are Good!" statement.

Just share the Gospel - Apologetics

2011-05-24T11:48:00.000-07:00

The pastor at my church's church gathering this Sunday said that many Christians are scarred to witness (testify) to their faith.

I think a lot of this comes down to fear of not knowing what to say, to not having the right answers or the right arguments. There can be some validity to that, but I don't think Christians need to know all the arguments against every objection to Christianity. I'm writing this for Christians right now, by the way.

Why should a Christian be required to fully know all the ins and outs of current scientific research and theories, or the history of every religion in the world, or a great response to every objection to the Bible?

What we are required to know is Jesus! We need to know Jesus, which means knowing the four gospels, what Jesus taught and did. Every Christian knows Jesus! The good news of Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection has the power to save someone. Our clever arguments do not save people, and when has a person ever become a Christian because they lost the argument. Ultimately, it's hearing the Gospel that brings conversion.

One might ask, is sharing the Gospel truly defending the faith? Yea, in most cases; it is. Romans 1:16 "I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes."

The Macho Man, Randy Savage, Stops The Rapture

2011-05-22T17:19:00.000-07:00

Everyone knew that the rapture prediction for yesterday was wrong - at least they should have all known. If you want to know what Jesus said about the end of of this age, I suggest reading Matthew 24. The entire chapter is devoted to signs of the end of the age. In verse 36 Jesus says, "No one knows about that day or hour, no even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." So if some guy named Harold Camping comes along claiming it's the end - it's not going to happen.

Harold had some sort of formula he claims he got from Scripture to get the May 21st date. What he didn't count on was the Macho Man, Randy Savage, dying the day before. I'm a firm believer that a lot of the stuff we do for fun in this life, will also be done for fun in heaven, as long as its not a sin, of course. Maybe wrestling is a sin, but I don't think so. Randy was so excited to be heaven (I'm not sure his religious beliefs, but let's just say he was so excited to be heaven), that the first thing he wanted to do with Jesus was have a wrestling match. "Oh, yea!" And incidentally, the Macho Man stopped the Rapture. No one knows the time of Christ's return and no one can predict it.

"Oh, Yea! Slam into a Slim Jim!"

One Minute Apologist Video #1

2011-05-19T21:19:00.000-07:00

One Minute Apologist looks at the Bible and the Qur'an - which is the Word of God? Obviously, neither could the Word of God, but because of contradictions, the both can't be the Word of God.

Here's a summary of the short video:

They both can’t be true.

Historically establish that Jesus predicted his violent death and that he died a violent death, then Bible must be correct and not the Qur’an. If he didn’t die a violent death, then the Qur’an would be correct on that point, however it would be wrong on Jesus being a prophet, because Jesus predicted he would die a violent death, but he did not. Catch 22.

Broken, Beat, and Scarred - Why does God allow suffering?

2011-05-11T08:14:00.000-07:00

"Broken, beat, and scarred. We die hard. What doesn't kill us, makes us more strong. We rise, we fall, we get up again. What doesn't kill us makes us more strong. Broken, beat, and scarred. We die hard!!!"

Some pretty intense lyrics if we think about them. They come from the Metallica song, "Broken, beat, and scarred".

When I read the writings of the apostle Paul and hear about his flogging, stonings, and imprisonments, I think that I surely haven't suffered much for my Christian faith. Despite all of Paul's persecution's he kept rising up again. Forget John McClaine - The Apostle Paul knew what it meant to "Die Hard". I have not yet shed blood for my faith in Jesus in Christ. I might never do so, but the words of Paul still ring true for me and all of us when he says that suffering produces perseverance, and perseverance, character, and character, hope. And hope doesn't disappoint us.

But I know I complain a lot about my present sufferings. I think most of us do. But here, coming from Metallica, I am reminded that what doesn't kill us makes us more strong. I think of Paul when he said, "When I am weak, I am strong." When he's weak, he has no choice but to cling to God! When he is holding on to God, then he is strong.

One complaint against Christianity is the problem of evil and suffering in the world. It's easy to say "what doesn't kill us makes us more strong" when it's simple sufferings, broken arm a bad breakup, but what about genocide, rape, a four-year old with cancer. We tend to want to wave our fist at God! What's your problem??? Why didn't you stop this. We can't see the good that can come from it. What loving Father would allow such a thing to his children - stronger - yea right!

The answer lies in Jesus. Being God, perfect and sinless, he still suffered. He suffered on our behalf, because of our shortcomings. It lies in God's patience with us! Does he want pain and suffering for us - no! But he allows it. If he were to intervene now, what would that mean for everyone who doesn't know him. He is patient in his return, waiting for more people to come to repentance? It's his will that no man should eternally perish - sadly, we are set to face a physical death as our exodus from this life. The answer won't satisfy everybody and I hope and pray that I stand firm in the faith and trust God's plan of redemption when the worst of the worst hits my life.

What about the saintly people of other religions?

2011-05-10T11:50:00.000-07:00

Christianity is certainly exclusive. Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ. Outside of faith in Christ, there isn't salvation. This rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and I'll be honest, on some days when I think about people I know who are outside of the Christian faith, it upsets me quite a lot too! Click on the topic pertaining to the unevangelized in the blog topics section to some more general answers the problem of the unevangelized and the problem of hell.

Springing from the position of exclusivity comes the argument of the "saintly" people of other religions. The Buddha had his act together and led many people away from self-centered desires and into enlightenment. The Dali Lama...come on... that guys more peaceful than Christians who follow the Prince of Peace. Ghandi...he led non-violent revolutionary protests in India, sparked from reading Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. Do all the "saintly" people of the other religions in the world go to hell, just because they don't believe in Jesus Christ?

Check out the following trailer for Rob Bell's book Love Wins. I think he's asking basically the same question about Ghandi and about Christian exclusivity?

So what about the saintly people of other religions?

Christianity is not a religion about human works. It's a relationship with the God who stepped down from heaven and did the works required for salvation for us, because we are incapable of doing the perfect works required of us by God. So, our works don't save us.

These "saintly" people were good in the world's eyes, not in God's. In God's eyes, we're all sinners deserving his wraith, unless we have faith in Christ or bore that wraith on our behalf.

Following a set of morals and ethics doesn't make a religion true.

And lastly, Bell is off in his presentation in this video. He's casting questions and doubts trying to raise conversation centered on Christ. If people mistakenly misinterpret the Gospel as he says, to believe that it is about God having to save us from himself, then he should supply the answer in the video instead of letting it hang as if that's the truth, or that Christians have it all wrong, because Christians don't have it wrong. The Gospel isn't saving us from God, it's always been God saving us from ourselves, from our sinfulness, and that is through Christ, and that is how all people come to salvation.

Jesus is the Savior of the Buddhist, of the Hindu, of the Jew, of the Muslim, of the atheist, and etc. To receive that salvation, a person must have faith in him.

Universe #2 - Natural Explanations for the Universes Existence

2011-05-03T16:46:00.000-07:00

Clearly the Big Bang Theory and the Law of Entropy dictate a starting point to the universe. An eternal, all-powerful God is the best explanation for the cause of the universe's existence.

God doesn't have to be the only explanation for the universe's origin. There are natural explanations.

1. The universe could have created itself.

However this isn't a very good explanation is it? How could something exist before existed in order to create itself. That's like saying I existed before my conception and conceived myself. That's just not plausible.

2. The universe could have popped into existence from nothing!

However, when has this ever occurred? From nothing, nothing comes.

3. The universe could have sprang from another universe, like a multiverse that produces more universes.

That's great in speculation. It's mere theory. Is this at all observable? Is there any date to support this? Not that I know of. And does this really solve the God dilemma? Nope. This explanation still doesn't account for the origin of the first universe.

4. The universe is eternal.

We're back to the first post now! This explanation goes against the Law of Entropy, a law, not a theory, and it goes against the Big Bang Theory too.

Any other natural explanations?

The Universe #1

2011-05-02T07:58:00.000-07:00

The Big Bang Theory hypothesizes that the universe had a singular beginning. This theory is derived from the observations that the universe is outwardly expanding in all directions.

The Law of Entropy, a scientific law, not just a theory, shows that the universe is in a non-reversible state of decay. Energy is being dissipated throughout the universe. It will come a time when the universe turns cold, that everywhere is the exact same temperature. When this happens, the universe, essentially, will be dead. This law shows that the universe is not eternal.

The Big Bang Theory and the Law of Entropy working together clearly show the universe to have an origin. We cannot make believe that the universe is eternal and has always existed. What could have came before the origin of the universe? From nothing, nothing comes, so there must have been something before the universe's beginning. Something must have existed before the universe, right?

1 Corinthians 15 -Video For Easter

2011-04-24T09:25:00.000-07:00

In the last post, I mentioned reading 1 Corinthians 15. It's an early creed of the Christians.

Here's a video featuring Dr. Gary Habermas speaking on the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Most of his affirmative case for the resurrection centers on 1 Corinthians 15.

Also, did you know that in China, the name they have for Easter is "Resurrection Day". Pretty cool, if you ask me. Maybe English speaking Christians can adopt this name and quit using Easter.

Christianity = Falsifiable

2011-04-23T10:46:00.000-07:00

Carl Popy, one of the gents who regularly goes to UCI to hand-out coffee, sent me a text this morning that asked, "What do you think about making a sign that says Christianity = Falsifiable?"

So in case you aren't familiar with older posts, we hand out coffee at University of California Irvine and often times put signs on the front of the table to promote religious conversation that opens the door to presenting the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Usually we use "Religion is for the Weak" or a "Contradiction" sign made up of different religious symbols. Or we just have the "Free Coffee" sign. That works well.

I really like Carl Popy's latest idea sign idea though. If anyone getting our free coffee handouts asks what does this mean pointing to the sign, we instantly get to speak about the Gospel and how it can be historically tested. Jesus was a historical individual and as a historical individual the claims written about him can be tested and verified like any other person in ancient history. In the case of Jesus, however, there are miracles attributed to him. Divinity being attributed to him isn't very unique, because lots of ancient leaders, rulers, and emperors claimed divinity, but unlike Jesus, they didn't have the miracles attributed to them, and they definitely didn't have a resurrection from the dead to back up their claims to divinity.

Christianity is falsifiable because if the resurrection didn't happen, Christianity is not true. If Jesus didn't rise from the dead, Christianity is a hoax. Prove that Jesus didn't rise from the dead and you've proven that Christianity is false. Therefore Christianity is falsifiable. To have faith in Jesus, the Christ, a person doesn't have to have blind faith.

Since it's the day before Easter, I'd recommend reading 1 Corinthians 15.

It's Saturday. But Sunday's coming.

To learn more about the falsifiable nature of Christianity, read 1 Corinthians 15. It's clearly stated in the Bible that Christianity can be false and the apostle Paul lays the heart of Christianity bear for anyone in the first century, or now, to run a stake through. But no one has, not yet.

Jesus' Crucifixion

2011-04-18T08:26:00.000-07:00

This video is a doctor speaking on Jesus' crucifixion...

I think it is fitting during this week in the church's yearly calendar.

It can't be embedded from youtube, so here is the link for it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-EVfxABSoU.

Seven Pounds - Palm Sunday

2011-04-17T17:37:00.000-07:00

Last night I watched the movie Seven Pounds. The star of the film is Will Smith.

I was completely confused for quite a while in the movie. It starts with Will Smith calling in to 911 to report a suicide, his own. You know throughout that he at one point was married and that he is somehow connected to a car accident that took the lives of seven people. The description of the film lets you know that he's helping seven strangers! But it's hard to tell how he's helping them and even who the seven people are for most of the movie.

Spoiler Alert starting now! Don't read onward if you don't want to know what happens in the film. I'd recommend watching the movie then coming back to finish reading the rest of this post.

Will Smith gives his awesome beach house to a lady who has two kids so they can flee the beatings of her boyfriend. As the movie nears its ends you see that he gives a bone marrow donation for a boy who is dying. All along he's been helping a lady who has a failing heart and is waiting for a donor for a transplant. It also appears that he somehow plans on helping a blind man (Woody Harrelson).

At the very end, you realize that just as he gave bone marrow to help the little boy, he plans on giving his heart and eyes to help the lady and the blind man. No way! Back to the beginning of the movie, he calls in his suicide. Then it keeps playing from there and he crawls into a bathtub full of ice-water, you know, to preserve the organs he plans on donating. He then drops the deadliest creature on the planet into the tub with him, the box-jelly fish! He's stung. As he is dying it flashes to the accident. He was the driver of the accident that killed his wife (maybe just fiance) and six others (one of the seven being his unborn child). He dies! But the lady gets his heart and the blind man, named Ezra, gets to see! His childhood friend knew his plans and he was the one who was able to set-up the transplants.

It's pretty insane as it unfolds. For most of the movie, as it cuts forward and back the film doesn't let you know what he's doing and tricks you into thinking he's a bad guy, but then a good guy, and etc. you are left in the dark not certain of what is actually happening or what the goal is. You discover though that his brother needed a lung, he gave part of his liver to a woman who needed it, gave his home to the one lady, bone marrow to the kid, something to other guy (I think I missed what that was as I was watching it), his heart and his eyes. He killed seven people by mistake, but with his own life gave life to seven others!

For Palm Sunday

Palm Sunday marks the day that Jesus rode into Jerusalem and many of his people claimed him to be their king, although they didn't know that they were actually selecting their passover lamb (since today is the day Israel selected the lamb for slaughter for the passover - God and his timing and planning!). He then willfully hung out in the city until his crucifixion. He never once fought or defended himself, although he could have easily done so. Why did he so passively suffer one of, if not the worst possible death, Roman crucifixion? Because he knew that by offering his life, he could give life to many!

We are not like Jesus and can't die to give eternal life to someone else, and we certainly shouldn't be like the Will Smith character in Seven Pounds and commit suicide to save others, although what if you wanted to do so... wow! That would be a sign of love and dedication. In the movie, this was more of an act of guilt or retribution, not love, but what if you knew your wife was dying and could use your heart?

Regardless, what I walked away from the movie recognizing is that God the Father sent his Son to die for us! Jesus willingly gave his life. We all have been given the gift of life from God. The Father has blessed us to be a blessing to others. We can give of our lives, gifts, and talents to bless others. Just as Jesus in his last night with his disciples broke bread and gave it to them saying that it was his body broken for them, we too can give of ourselves to others and bless them. And in this giving we too will truly find life.

For this week of Holy Week (the name given to the week in the church from Palm Sunday to Easter), let's look to Jesus and do our best to follow in his willful and sacrificial steps.

Don't talk about Christianity - Focus on Jesus!

2011-04-10T17:46:00.000-07:00

I've heard the quote, "I don't like your Christians, but I like your Christ," attributed to Ghandi.

I think Ghandi said this because on paper, Jesus is the greatest human being to ever walk this earth! His moral and ethical teachings are hands down the best. They're quoted even to this day by people who are not Christians, such classic gems as, "Love your neighbor as youself," now called the Golden Rule. Some have even traced the freedom and equality of women in society, which women enjoy in the West, directly to Jesus' teachings and interactions with and concerning women. Parables attributed to Jesus' teachings in the Gospels can be found in non-religious literary textbooks, as well as his famous Sermon on the Mount. He's always at or near the top of the list for most influential people in history.

It seems that a growing number of people are taking a stance like Ghandi, liking Christ but not liking "organized religion". They cite the crusades! They cite fraudulent practices within the church to make a buck, they cite Roman Catholic priests who molest boys, and other horrendous acts committed by Christians who don't live up to the teachings of Christ.

I'd like to note that these people are focusing on the ability of Christians to live up to Jesus' teachings in the law as a way of justifying faith in Christ. Faith in Christ is not centered on the observance of the law. In fact, in his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharasees (religious goody-goodies), you can't enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus in this one claim, threw everyone under the bus of condemnation who heard his sermon! The people hearing them, knew that no one's righteousness could surpass that of the Pharasees.

You see, Christianity is not a way of life - it is life! If someone discredits Christianity because of the sinful lives of Christians, then they don't even know what they are rejecting. We must move beyond Christianity and focus on Christ! Who is he? He must share that he was more than a good man, more than a moral teacher, more than a sacrificial philanthropist of the early first century. He claimed to be God! A good man can't claim to be God if he's not God. If he claims to be God and he's not God, he's a liar, not a good man! He's a deceiver. Or if he thinks he's God, but he's not, he must be deranged, a lunatic. None of these fit with his character recorded within the Bible or from extra-biblical sources near the time of his life. His disciples could have always lied in their historical accounts of him, but why would they do that? They didn't gain anything for their efforts besides persecution and death.

In conclusion, we must focus on Christianity. Who is Jesus, what did he claim about himself, did he back up those claims? What if he rose from the grave as the Gospels proclaim? What would that mean? Does that verify his claims to divinity? Ask questions that lead people to Jesus, to the good news. Admit the faults of the church, admit the stain of sin within us all, admit that Jesus acknowledged that none of us could live up to the righteousness required in his teachings - that's why we need him, our Savior from sin and death! Encourage people to look at all of Christ's message, not just his morals! If you only accept the ethics in Christ's teachings, then you don't really like Christ! Don't reject Christ because of Christians. Christians are the messengers, not the message. Don't let the messengers get in the way of the message. Focus on Jesus!

Chrsitian Lingo in Apologetics

2011-04-08T09:39:00.000-07:00

Christian apologetics, based on the meaning of the word apologetics, is a defense of the Christian faith. This defense is ultimately for protecting and safeguarding a Christian from doubts that might erode and destroy the his or her faith. In fact, doubting questions can be good things in the life of a Christian. It brings Christians to think deeply about their faith and draws them to God's Word for answers and to God in prayer. When properly defended against, growth occurs in the life of a Christian and faith is strengthened.

However, often times, apologetics isn't viewed simply as a defensive endeavor. Many times, it's approached from an offensive intent to debate and persuade an unbeliever to drop their guard and hear the Gospel, or as a way to continue the dialog to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ again and again.

When sharing a defense for the faith with a non-Christian, Christians need to be aware of the lingo they use. Chrsitians might use the word Gospel for instance and a non-Christian might not know what that means. It means good news by the way. Christians might use fancy words such as justification and sanctification or atonement, or even sin! Does the non-Christian have the same understanding of these words as a Christian? Non-Christians might especially if they have studied the Christian faith or grew up in a Christian family, but to many such terms might be obscure, or they have their own understanding of such terms which do not fit the biblical meaning of such words.

Washed in the blood of the lamb...
Born again...
Faith...

Washed in the Blood of the Lamb. I get it? Would someone who isn't Christian get this phrase without explanation?

Just be careful, Christians, when dialoging with and sharing the Christian faith with those who may not understand the meaning of the words we like to use.

When to speak and who to speak to?

2011-04-02T12:14:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago a video was played in church of people being interviewed on the street answering the question about what they believe about God. After the video was finished playing, our pastor mentioned that many of these people are the people we as Christians need to speaking to and need to be sharing the message of Christ and the love of Christ with. It got me thinking...

Who do we need to be sharing our faith with on a day to day basis?

I know that in today's Christian culture and climate there has come the habit or teaching that we should share our faith with those we know or have relationship with and that in fact a good solid relationship should be built before sharing the faith at all.

I've mentioned before on this blog that I go to UCI and hand out coffee for free to students and from there I share the Christian faith with them and reason with them about why I think it's true and why I am compelled to spend time out there speaking my faith with them (along with some other Christians, I don't do this alone). In this scenario, we are giving something out for free that they want. They usually ask why we are there and we can tell them because we are Christians and we want to share our faith with others or we have signs on the table that prompt Jesus centered conversation when they ask what they mean.

But I was a little bit convicted from the video played at church! The great commission as I've heard it translated actually says, "as you go" make disciples. As we go! That's anywhere in life.

Should I be sharing Christ with the grocery store clerk, other bikers at red lights (since I bike for transportation a lot), my apartment neighbors, people who draw my blood from the Red Cross, people I pass shopping, etc.? In the case of my grocery store clerk, I do have a relationship in a way, or at least I should... I shop at the same store and see the same clerks and managers every time.

How would I begin? What's the initial conversation starter? Is this something Christians should be doing?

Do we need to go door to door like the Mormons? I do ride a bike after all. :)

Thoughts?

Reason Enough

2011-04-01T14:55:00.000-07:00

I went to an apologetics conference last year at Hepatha Lutheran Church in Anaheim, CA. I went because Kenneth Samples, the author of Without a Doubt, the apologetics text book I use in my high school apologetics class was speaking at one of the sessions. A few students went last year and they enjoyed it!

Maybe you would like to go to the conference this year. It's called Reason to Believe.

If you can't make it to every session and don't want to pay full price, tell the people at the check-in that you are with Crean Lutheran High School and you were told you could pay $5 per session.

Check it out here.

Social Pluralism Vs. Metaphysical Pluralism

2011-03-31T18:36:00.000-07:00

By now I'm guessing anyone who is reading this blog is involved enough with religious discussion and culture that you have seen the Coexist bumper stickers or the Tolerance bumper stickers.

The current chapter we are covering in our high school apologetic book, Without a Doubt, is entitled, "Do All Religions Lead to God?"

All religions lead to God. Is that what people who have the Tolerance bumper sticker on the back of their car mean? The idea that all religions are equally valid and true is metaphysical pluralism. There is also social pluralism, which recognizes that there are drastic differences in religions, to such a degree that they do in fact contradict each other, and that they can't all be true, however, a social pluralist recognizes the need for freedom of expression and belief and tolerance of various religious beliefs for peace in society.

Since it does say tolerance, or co-exists, depending on which sticker is being referenced, this sticker could in fact mean social pluralism and not metaphysical pluralism. One student says he knows a family at his Christian church who has this on their car. It's likely they're social pluralist since they are at a Christian church regularly. He doesn't personally know the family, he's just seen the car in the lot.

I bring this up because this could be a great opener for conversation with someone who has a tolerance bumper sticker; "What does this mean to you?" Depending on the response, a Christian reply would differ.

If the person views it as a call to social pluralism, then an appropriate response could be, "Oh cool. I'm a Christian and I agree with you. There is a definite need for tolerance of different religious and philosophical world views in society. We need this tolerance in order to have meaningful discussions concerning faith. However, it's good to note that religions have contradicting teachings and can't all be true. Some people think this what your sticker means. Did you know that?" You can continue after some dialog to share examples of how they contradict and share how Christianity is the only free religion in that salvation is from God and not from human merit, or how Jesus is God in the flesh in Christianity and in other religions, such as Islam, he is just a prophet, or in Judaism, just a heretic that was crucified.

If the person has a metaphysical pluralistic view of the world's religions, then you can ask more questions about why they think so and express your understanding for wanting this to be true, but kindly share how this can't be true based on the law of non-contradiction. A Christian can then guide and show how they contradict each other while sharing who Christ is as revealed in the Bible, or even lead the person into social pluralism and not metaphysical pluralism.

Either view of the tolerance bumper sticker leads to an opportunity to present who Jesus is and what he has done for mankind.

Questioning God - MP3 Messages

2011-03-30T07:56:00.000-07:00

Rock Harbor is a church in Costa Mesa, CA. Their teaching pastor used to be Mike Erre. He is the author of several books. The only one I have read all the way through is The Jesus of Suburbia. I have also read parts of his book Death by Church.

He is now at a church nearby Rock Harbor in Mission Viejo, CA.

Questioning God is a message series which he gave at Rock Harbor several years ago. It's a good intro to apologetics series. I listened to all of these while riding my e-bike to work in Hangzhou, China.

Hope you enjoy them.

Questioning God Series - Click Here to Download!

Prescience #2 - Circumcision

2011-03-29T08:39:00.000-07:00

In class yesterday, a student asked if a person needed to be circumcised to be a Christian. I had to ask, "Is this a serious question, or did you just want to say circumcision?" I had hoped that we had covered this when discussed what grace is and how one is justified in God's sight! Oh well.

So, we took a break from starting our new chapter on "The Means of Grace" and read Romans 4. The question was answered and resolved. We are credited as righteous in God's sight, not based on any merit of our own or any outward sign such as circumcision, but on faith in the declared promises of God (fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ!).

But this brought up another prescience issue within the Bible. God's people were circumcised! Today, in America at least, almost every male is circumcised regardless of a family's religious views, because it's more sanitary and hygienic than not being cut. I'm not sure exactly when we came to this conclusion, but we have! The Isralites likely didn't know this perk to circumcision when they followed God's command, but God sure did. Another sign of prescience in the Bible.

Sorry, no pictures for this post.

Prescience #1 - Dietary Restrictions

2011-03-27T19:06:00.000-07:00

As defined by William J. Cairney in Evidence for Faith prescience is "the occurrence, in Scripture, of accurate statements reflecting in-depth knowledge of scientific concepts far before mankind had laid the technological base for such things to be known."

Cairney points out of course that prescience in the Bible isn't an end in itself. Such evidence only increases our knowledge of Scripture and appreciation for the God revealed in the Bible.

Cairney first focuses on the dietary laws in Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The unclean animals in addition to not being eaten, weren't even supposed to be touched if it could avoided at all costs (Leviticus 11:24-28). Pigs were on the top of the "unclean" list. The downer to the Jews is that they were readily available to be eaten and were of course tasty and tender. The upside is that pigs, or swine, "harbor several disease-producing microorganisms easily transmissible to man" (Cairney, p.132 of Evidence for Faith). Such micro-organisms are tapeworms. Disseases such as Trichinosis, Erysipelas, and Typhoid are all caused by micro-organisms that pigs carry. Some of these diseases are contracted by eating under-cooked meat, but others can be contracted simply by touching an infected animal or carcass.

Other "unclean" animals are marine animals without fins or scales, usually bottom-feeders; they eat fecal matter to put it nicely. Rodents were unclean - enough said. But they would have been accessible and likely tender, but they're naturally carriers of some of the nastiest diseases man has ever faced. Don't eat, don't touch, and surely you don't want to be bitten!

Better wash your hands!

Turtles and lizards were on the "naughty" list too. Young kids who have these animals as pets sometimes get Salmonella! Yay! If they're taken from stagnant water or contaminated water, they're a source of diesease inducing micro-organisms.

Basically, all the "unclean" animals can lead to disease in handling and eating if not properly kept. The clean animals were quite chill in this regards.

Cairney also shares how some of the laws for keeping and growing plants also spared one's self from disease-causing micro-organisms.

Exodus15:26 is a promise from God that if they follow these dietary laws he won't bring diseases upon them.

So how did Moses know this? He didn't have a microscope! Most of this knowledge was only gleaned in the past 100 years. Was he that observant? Did the Egyptians know that much? Maybe some other advance culture brought the info in to Moses? Aliens perhaps? Or the God of the Bible who created all things and didn't need a microscope to know which animals carried micro-organisms which caused diseases told Moses which animals not to eat and which ones were cool to consume and handle.

Reasonable Faith in an Uncertain World

2011-03-22T05:55:00.000-07:00

This is all copied from www.allyourmind.net:

Join us April 15-16 for our 2011 lecture series!

The Reasonable Faith Central Valley Chapter is proud to announce our 2011 lecture series, “Reasonable Faith in an Uncertain World,” with keynote speaker, Dr. William Lane Craig.
The full list of speakers for this year’s series is:

The series will take place April 15-16 at Monte Vista Chapel in Turlock, CA. (Coming from out of town? Check our lodging page for hotel recommendations.) Registration is just $10 and includes a copy of William Lane Craig’s newest book, “On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision.”

* Free copies of William Lane Craig’s newest book, “On Guard” are guaranteed to attendees who register or purchase tickets before the event. Online registration is paperless.

For more information, contact us at reasonablefaith@allyourmind.net

Stairway to Heaven has a hidden, Satanic message.

2011-03-19T13:58:00.000-07:00

"Stairway to Heaven" by Led Zeppelin played backwards contains Satanic lyrics, words actually being sung to Satan. Is this true or is it not true? It can only be done with a record player. I could be corrupted as a judge because I first watched videos that played the song backwards with lyrics of what you are supposed to hear if it's Satanic. Interestingly enough, I've seen different versions of the lyrics and some of them are quite, quite different, but every time I have listened to it I do hear whatever is posted with the song. Is this a case of the mind just synching up what's being heard with what is being read?

Here's a video with the song played backwards with no lyrics. Watch it and see if you hear a Satanic message. By the way, you might have to listen to the whole song, since some of the people who claim there is a hidden message don't have it matching with every line of the song being played forwards. Let me know if you hear anything?

In closing, I think this song is actually pro-Christian and anti-Satan. The song the way I interpret it is about a lady who has it all, beauty, riches, and fame, and she thinks that with her own abilities she can buy her salvation. However, she finds that salvation can't be bought. The store to do so is closed. There's still time for everyone who is on her path to get on to the other path as the famous line in the song says. But then again, who can tell with this song? It could mean anything? There's even a line about when all is one and one is all. That certainly sounds like new-age mysticism. Here is what I do know. In Genesis 28 Jacob has a dream of a stairway that connects heaven and earth and in John 1:51 Jesus references this dream and essentially says, "I am the Stairway to Heaven." When you look at Christianity and what the Bible teaches, it is the only religion which says the way to salvation can't be bought. It's the only free religion in the world. It's the only religion in which God has stepped down and has done it all for your salvation. The Stairway has come down to us, and Jesus is that Stairway. He is a Rock that doesn't roll.

St. Patrick's Day

2011-03-17T16:20:00.000-07:00

I received this today from our high school's executive director, a retired Lutheran pastor. Sorry for the horrible spacing! It's how it copies into my blog from the email I received. I can fix it and make it look good, but as soon as I post it goes back to normal.

May we, like Patrick, be winsome witnesses for Jesus!

St. Patrick

St. Patrick was born in Scotland and was kidnapped and sold in Ireland as a slave. He became

fluent in the Irish language before making his escape to the continent. Eventually he was ordained

as a deacon, then priest and finally as a bishop. Pope Celestine then sent him back to Ireland to

preach the Gospel. As a missionary, he spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ everywhere he traveled,

most importantly leaving the saving Gospel in every place he visited. His Christian witness left an

impression because of the many places in Brittany, Cornwall, Wales, Scotland and Ireland that are

named after him.

Patrick is most known the world over for having driven the snakes from Ireland. It is true that today there

are no snakes in Ireland. Two interesting stories and legends lie behind this fact.

First, snakes (Gen. 3:1‑15) are a symbol of the devil in the Bible. Different tales tell of Patrick's standing

upon a hill, using a wooden staff to drive the serpents into the sea, banishing them forever from the shores

of Ireland. One legend says that one old serpent resisted, but the saint overcame it by cunning. He is said

to have made a box and invited the reptile to enter. The snake insisted the box was too small and the

discussion became very heated. Finally the snake entered the box to prove he was right, whereupon St

Patrick slammed the lid and cast the box into the sea. Driving the snakes from Ireland was probably

symbolic of putting an end to pagan practices in that country. While not the first to bring Christianity to

Ireland, it was Patrick who encountered the Druids at Tara and abolished their pagan rites. He converted

the warrior chiefs and princes, baptizing them and thousands of their subjects in the Holy Wells which still

bear that name. According to tradition St. Patrick died in A.D. 493.

The second interesting thing to note about the absence of snakes in Ireland is related to the shamrock.

As in many old pagan religions serpent symbols were common, and possibly even worshiped. The

Shamrock, at one time called the "Seamroy", symbolizes the cross and the Trinity. The well known legend

of the Shamrock connects it to St. Patrick and his teaching. Preaching in the open air to crowds of people

‑‑ including children, he is said to have illustrated the existence of the Father‑Son‑and Holy Spirit by

plucking a shamrock from the grass growing at his feet and showing it to his congregation. The legend of

the shamrock is also connected with that snakes are never seen on trefoil (shamrocks) and that shamrocks

are a remedy against the stings of snakes and scorpions ‑‑ just as our Lord, in the fullness of His holiness

(Father, Son, Holy Spirit) will always ward of the devil and His ways AND that our Lord is the only

effective treatment against sin, death, and the devil.

How much of this is 100% true?
I don't know. Who cares? It all sounds great if it is.
Happy St. Patrick's Day!

RE: The Atheist Experience #654

2011-03-10T21:06:00.000-08:00

0:15-0:20 - Christian says, "How do you know that God isn't real?" Atheist says, "Have you demonstrated that he is?" My response: Why would I need to demonstrate who God is? If God exists, he is more powerful and capable than me to demonstrate his own existence. As a Christian, I look at the historical person of Jesus and conclude from his life, teachings, and actions that he is God. If this I am correct, then I don't need to demonstrate that God is real, he has demonstrated that for us. Then I'd see where the conversation goes.

0:27:-1:01 - The Christian then begins to quote Romans 1:20, which says that humanity can tell that there is a God from what he has made. In other words, the world reveals that there must be a creator. Before he can even quote this verse, the atheist interrupts him, and asks. "Why are you even quoting the Bible? It means nothing to me. Why should I listen to the Bible?" My response: I personally wouldn't have gone to quoting the Bible at this point in the conversation. I think it would naturally bring up a brick wall. I previously would have set the conversation up on the historical life of Jesus and examining his life, words, actions, death, and resurrection (for the atheist, "supposed" resurrection). This instantly gets to the heart of Christianity! Jesus Christ. Going to Romans 1:20 only serves the purpose of showing that from observations in the world, there must be a god. That doesn't tell us who that god is, which isn't as helpful as showing the atheist who God actually is, Jesus Christ. And yes, I personally agree with the atheist, the Bible doesn't mean anything to him, so why quote it? Especially if all you plan on showing from quoting is that there is a god who exists from what we can see, tell, hear, and touch a part from the Bible.

1:03-1:18 - The atheist says he's upset because Christians are calling in asserting that atheist don't believe in the existence of God and says that's not what their stance is. My response: No, that's what an atheist is. A = against. Against God. No God. There is not God. Maybe they're actually agnostics and claim to not be able to know one way or the other, but as you can tell from their arguments to come, they are atheist and don't believe there is a God.

1:20-1:37 - The atheist asks again, "Why should I listen to the Bible?" The Christian responds that it's true and he knows it is true because it is through faith! The atheist then throws out, "Well, how do you know the Qur'an isn't true?" My response: The Christian here is using a faulty argument. His answer, although I believe can be very much true for himself, opens up a can of worms - if truth comes from an inner subjective knowing or feeling, then how can anyone be certain of what is true? The Qur'an might as well be true, just as a Spider-Man comic book might be true! People do the same thing against the Bible though. Atheists use the same circular logic that the Christian caller in this video made. Atheists say that miracles don't happen and God doesn't exist. Then they say that the Bible isn't a reliable historical document because it contains God and accounts of miracles.

1:45-2:05 - The atheists claim that the God of the Bible is based on the same God of the Qur'an. My response: The Bible isn't based on the same God as the God of the Qur'an. Christianity teaches that God is a Trinity, three persons who all share in the same divine essence. Islam on the other hand teaches only the oneness of God and rejects the threeness of God as revealed in the Bible. Jesus claimed to be God, and Christians believe he is God. Islam says Jesus is not God, they reject that he ever made such claims, and teach that he is just a prophet. Clearly, it's not based on the same God.

2:08-2:59 - The Chrstian changes the topic back to looking at the world and being able to deduct that there must be a God. He says, "How did we all happen to be? We can't just come from nothing." The atheists then say they came from their parents. The Christian then traces it back further to the universe. The atheists move on to say that the sun came from gravity acting on particles. My response: Where did the gravity come from? Where did the particles come from? Everything must come from something? Where did the matter of the "Big Bang" come from? How did it originate? We came from our parents as you said? Where did that matter come from? What produced it? Nothingness?

3:00-3:13 - The atheist says, "We didn't have to be here at all. Fortunately, the laws of the universe were such that physics prompted things to happen in such a way that we are the current state of life on this planet." My response: Where did the laws come from? Do laws appear naturally? How could such laws have come into existence and remain constant if the universe and life as we know it happened based upon random chance acting in a, as you said, "fortunate" way for us to exist? All the laws we have in our governments were created by lawmakers, and those lawmakers work to enforce and keep those laws. Why would the laws of the universe be any different? Wouldn't such laws indicate that there must have be lawmaker?

3:25-4:18 - My response: Jesus was a historical person. His life and death and Christianity's claims that he rose from the dead can be investigated and evaluated just as any person, place, and event of ancient history can be investigated. This clearly means that Christianity can be tested. It is demonstrable. If it can be proven that Jesus did not rise from the dead, then Christianity is not true. How do we evaluate other historical claims about events, places, and people from ancient history? Let's take that same criteria and apply it to Jesus of Nazareth. After we do this, I think we can then decide if there God is real?

May 21st 2011 - End of the World - Harold Camping

2011-03-07T22:05:00.000-08:00

On Feb. 18th, I went to Los Angeles to see a Henry Rollins, Spoken Word show. Walking after the show, I saw a giant billboard that declared that the end was coming on May 21st, 2011. It looked very similar to the one below:

A week or so after seeing the billboard sign, I heard it talked about on a Christian radio program. They said that the leader behind this group is Harold Camping, and they definitely placed his group as a cult. From what they said on the air and from what I'm reading on-line, this is not the first time Camping has made an end of the world claim. He was wrong then, and he'll likely be wrong this time too! In addition to these far-fetched end of the world claims, which he somehow deducts from Scripture, he also teaches that the Holy Spirit has left the church and he encourages people to leave their churches because of this. His group, I guess, according to Camping, has the Holy Spirit.

If you'd like to learn more about Harold Camping and his group and his end of the world claims check out the following websites:

Airo-Cross.Blogspot.com

Aomin.org

www.gotquestions.org

In conclusion, May 21st, 2011, is supposed to be the rapture according to Camping. Then on October 21st, 2011, it's supposed to be the end of the world. If none of these comes true, which it won't, let's check to see the response of Harold Camping and his followers. Will they admit they were wrong, or will they just pick another date a decade or so away?

An American Antique Mall - Non-Christian Culture

2011-03-06T22:03:00.000-08:00

Let's take a stroll through an American Antique Mall!


San Juan Capistrano, California

Nice set of containers.

As to be expected, lots of country-style antiques.

Nothing, too out of the ordinary for an antique barn mall!


Of course, Santa and the Buddha hanging out is quite a juxtaposition.


And the Buddhist antiques just kept coming...

And then things get even more out there...

Antique Ouija Board


Oh, nice antique picture...


Not!!! It's a hologram that changes as you walk past it. Sort of spooked me at first. I wasn't expecting to see this in the Antique Barn Mall right next to the historic San Juan Mission!

Magic potions anyone...

Or some other creepy stuff. It's like walking into the attic in the movie, The Goonies.

What's the point to me showing all of this? At the downtown historic walking street of San Juan Capistrano, in an American, country-style, barn antique mall, there are Ouija boards, skeletons, magic potion ingredients, skeletons, loads of Buddhist trinkets, jewelry, and statues, as well as an entire section dedicated to old Playboy magazines. We are definitely beyond being a "Christian" nation. The culture of America is moving far from its Christian roots. This is vital for us to know as Christians, because this means we need to change our methods of outreach and the way we interact in the community. We're moving into a post-Christian culture as a whole. We also need to be more on guard and knowledgeable of what is "out there" so we can better defend against it and also communicate with those who are a part of this non-Christian culture!

Monty Python and The Swoon Theory

2011-03-03T08:18:00.000-08:00

However, there are some natural explanations which have been hypothesized as alternative possibilities for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. One of these natural explanations is the "Swoon Theory". The "Swoon Theory" suggests that Jesus Christ didn't die on the cross! He survived the crucifixion, which is how he was seen three days later by the disciples!

However, I think the following "Spamalot" video clip can help illustrate how this isn't very plausible. In the clip, it shows a cart being pulled around town collecting those who have died from the Bubonic Plague. Clearly, the guy pulling the cart can tell if someone is dead or not, and if they're not yet dead, they don't go on the cart. The same applies with criminals on the cross! The executioners can tell if they are dead or not! And if they're not dead yet, they don't get off the cross, and they certainly don't get buried into tombs.

Now for Jesus of Nazareth, I don't expect, even if he wasn't quite not dead yet, he wouldn't have been able to dance around like the fellow in Spamalot. He wouldn't have taken the flogging and the beating and the crucifixion and three days being buried without food and water to somehow roll away a giant rock by himself and parade around in such a state that people will go - "Dang, he rose from the dead and he can raise me from the dead too!" Even if he could do all those things, he'd need to see a doctor. He wouldn't be fooling anyone! What do you think?

Religious Pluralism #2

2011-03-02T08:00:00.000-08:00

Most people have likely seen the "Tolerance" bumper sticker where the word tolerance is spelled using religious symbols. What are the religious symbols that spell the word Tolerance? Religious tolerance is good, but it's good to remember that the teachings of the world's religions contradict each other.

Watch the Prezi presentation below to learn what the religious symbols of the "Tolerance" bumper sticker are. To watch the Prezi hit the forward and back buttons to move through the presentation. It will take a moment to load. You can also, click on more, then click on fullscreen to view the presentation in that mode.

Tolerance Bumper Sticker on Prezi

"Double Tap" Rule and the Swoon Theory

2011-03-01T08:59:00.000-08:00

There are some strands of evidence for the resurrection of Christ which seem very compelling. They are: the empty tomb, the post-crucifixion appearances of Christ, the transformation of the apostles, the conversion of Saul, the emergence of the early Christian church, and the switch from the last day of the week to the first day of the week for worship.

However, there are some natural explanations which have been hypothesized as alternative possibilities for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. One of these natural explanations is the "Swoon Theory". The "Swoon Theory" suggests that Jesus Christ didn't die on the cross! He survived the crucifixion, which is how he was seen three days later by the disciples!

In my high school apologetics class, we were discussing these natural explanations for the evidence we have and concerning the "Swoon Theory" a student made a reference to the movie, Zombieland. The survivor of the zombie apocalypse pictured in Zombieland, survived by following a list of rules. One of these rules is the "Double Tap" rule. If you think a zombie is dead, shoot it again to be sure! It's better to waste the ammo than to potentially become a zombie happy meal.

How does this relate to the "Swoon Theory"?

The Romans made sure someone was dead if they executed them! In the Gospels' accounts of the crucifixion, the executioners did a "Double Tap" on Jesus. He was dead, but to be sure they plunged a spear into his side, into his heart! He was dead. The "Swoon Theory" doesn't work.

Click to get a copy of Zombieland!

A great read for Easter, which is coming up soon in April.

Can believers be objective?

2011-02-26T15:05:00.000-08:00

If someone were to speak to a Mormon, and did a really good job of showing that the Book of Mormon isn't historically reliable, it wouldn't faze a Mormon much at all. Their certainty of the truth of Mormonism doesn't lie in objectivity - it lies in their personal, inner, gut-feeling of its truth! They use the phrase, "the burning in the bosom" a lot to express this inner-certainty. It's just an inner burning in their heart that confirms the truth of their their faith. Quite subjective, if you ask me.

But can believers be objective?

Paul E. Little in his book, Know Why You Believe, shares that, "One questionable idea, sometimes advanced, is that the miracle stories [in the Bible] must be discarded because they are told by believing disciples and are therefore not objective."

Is this true? Since the believing disciples are the ones reporting the miracles of Jesus, does it mean that they're not valid witnesses? Does their eyewitness testimony get discredited because they believe what they saw, heard, and experienced to be real and true?

Would this same line of reasoning discredit victims of malicious crimes from testifying because of their prejudice?

Does this mean that eyewitness accounts shouldn't be presented in our courts of law, because they might have some sort of prejudice? Should we only allow the testimonies of people who were not eyewitnesses to be be examined when making a verdict on what happened in any given day, time, and event?

For objectivity's sake we should take in to account the testimony of the witnesses, regardless of if they were disciples or not. What matters is not their beliefs, but if they were telling the truth about what occurred. In the case of the disciples most of them faced the possibility of death to back-up the validity of their claims, much as witnesses today in our courts of law must face the penalty of perjury if they are not telling the truth on the stand.

Paul E. Little answers this dilemma by concluding, "The crucial question in each case is truthfulness, not proximity or relationship to the events."

The Use of Technology and Christ #1

2011-02-23T21:01:00.000-08:00

February's issue of Lutheran Witness, focuses on the effects and uses of technology in the life of the individual Christian and with the Church. I think examining technology like this can aid Christian apologetics. Apologetics after all in its root means, defense. Does the use of technology potentially lead us away from Christ? Does it distract from the central teachings of the Bible? If the answer is yest to any of these questions, then we'll need to provide a defense for the faith in these areas. An article by Rev. Derek Roberts, associate pastor of First Lutheran Church, Knoxville, Tenn., provided "A Technology Litmus Test":

1. Does the new medium help convey the message or does it become the message, meaning, can the employment of the new technology overshadow or compromise the truth and mystery of Christ and the biblical Gospel, or does it further the Gospel message?

2. Is there a biblical or churchly reason to do something though new and different means?

3. How will specific populations such as the aged in the church respond to the new medium? Will it exclude or offend anyone, or will it enhance worship?

4. What is the total cost, and should those funds be distributed to a more worthy mission?

5. What kind of staff or volunteer help will this technology require?

What do you think? Is this a good "litmus test"? How would you answer these questions the way you have seen technology used in the individual life of Christians and within the Church?

Resurrection - Minimal Facts

2011-02-22T17:36:00.000-08:00

I'm on a Prezi kick at the moment. Prezi has many public domain presentations that can be embedded and downloaded. So, check this one out which is made by Clint Field.

I'd suggest viewing it in fullscreen mode, which can be accessed by clicking on "more".

If you can't view it, try updating your flash player.

Resurrection - Minimal Facts on Prezi

Wise Blood

2011-02-21T20:52:00.000-08:00

Sometimes there are songs which make reference to Christianity or have some sort of religious them, yet those songs do so in a way which might be directly against Christianity, or appear very negative towards Christianity, and not just Christianity, but Christ.

One such song is "Wiseblood" by Corossion of Conformity.

Here is a sampling of the lyrics from this song:

When I was young some wise fool told me
live & learn but nothing comes for free
so I did what I could when I was able
to keep the truth away from our table

Young blood creepin what you need
Wiseblood shake em down to his knees
guaranteed

Well I never walked I just learned to fly
heaven or high was the way I stayed alive
I've seen them devils pound our bible
you saints and sinners are both my rival

Young blood creepin what you need
Wiseblood shake em down to his knees
aim to please

The following is a Prezi presentation I made introducing how I found out about this band, why I initially listened to them, and also in this presentation I share how I take and apply these lyrics to my life as a follower of Christ. I know that many people who are are not followers of Christ listen to music like this. I think what I wrote in the presentation can be helpful to bring up in conversation with someone who is listening to this song, or similar songs. I also know many Christians who listen to music like this and even though the lyrics are by no means God-pleasing, I do believe that something positive can be taken away from this song in the life of a believer. I think Christians also need to know their audience and know what they currently think and believe about Christ and Christianity in order to have better conversations that lead non-believers to hearing and understanding the Gospel.

Prezi - Did the Resurrection Happen?

2011-02-20T12:57:00.000-08:00

This last Friday I didn't teach at school, because our staff had a teacher-in-service day at another Lutheran high school in the area. We heard some good reminders about encouraging students, being enthusiastic about our teaching, and body language in the classroom. In the break-out session, I chose to attend a session that addressed using technology in the classroom. I was introduced to Prezi. It's an alternative to using PowerPoint for presentations. I'm still experimenting with it. I love that Youtube videos can be quickly inserted into the video and instantly play in the flow of the presentation. I also like that Prezi presentations can be embedded into sites.

Here's my first Prezi presentation. There's not much written info in this actual presentation. I have it designed for my students to share info on each point that is presented, so we can have a lot of class discussion. For the natural explanations section, I plan on having students prepare and present role-plays to show how a Christian can refute the natural explanations as they arise in conversation.

Let me know what you think of this Prezi!

Tangled and Christ

2011-02-14T20:25:00.000-08:00

I've made some recent posts about using movies, or various stories, as springboards to conversations that can present the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I've also made several references to Paul's use of Greek poets and philosophers when presenting the Gospel message to the men of Athens in Acts 17. I think we need to do this more and more!

Here's an example of some discussion questions that can be used with the Disney movie, Tangled. I copied these from Christianity Today. They have numerous movie reviews on-line with similar discussion questions.

Hopefully, you can use some of these questions after watching Tangled with a friend once it's out on DVD! Also, hopefully, we all can start interacting with movies in such a way.

I loved the scene with the floating lanterns!
Click photo to get your copy.

Discussion starters
The narrator says, "She was running out of time and that's when people look for a miracle." Why do people look for miracles when they are desperate? Can being in trouble be a good thing? Do you believe in miracles?
Flynn tells Rapunzel that "rebellion is good … healthy even." Did he believe what he was saying or just using it to trick Rapunzel? What is true about this statement? What is false? What does it mean to rebel against authority? Can this be good? How?
When Rapunzel leaves the tower, she is internally conflicted because she loves her freedom and independence but feels guilty about disobeying her mom. Have you ever felt torn like this? Do you think it is OK to disobey if you think your parents are wrong?
Discuss Gothel's comment that "the world is dark and cruel. If it finds even the smallest ray of light, it destroys it." Is she right? How does that compare to a Christian worldview? Read these verses for further discussion.

Discussion Questions taken from here.

How would you answer these questions?

The Hero Cycle and Jesus Christ

2011-02-12T16:47:00.000-08:00

Sometimes a great starting point for discussing the deeper meanings to life with people who might not care to converse about such things is to start from somewhere not as personally intrusive, such as talking about movies. Or maybe watch a movie and bring up discussion questions after the movie, which might lead one down a trail towards openly speaking and sharing your views on life and God. For the Christian, this of course would mean sharing the teachings about humanity, sin, evil, good, God, and salvation found within the Bible.

Almost any movie can do this, since most movies follow the hero cycle laid out by Joseph Campbell in THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES.

Click image for more info.


Isn't that Luke Skywalker?

The overarching narrative of the Bible also follows this hero cycle. Christ is the hero who through death was able to bring life to all. Since most stories, especially fairy tales, follow this cycle, almost every movie contains elements that can be paralleled to those of the Bible's salvation narrative. Thus most stories can be used as good springboards to sharing the Gospel.

The Most Redeeming Films of 2010

2011-02-11T17:24:00.000-08:00

Here's a list of the most redeeming films of 2010 according to the critics of Christianity Today. To see this article on their website click here. If you click on the links in their article for each movie, you will be directed to a page for that specific movie. Maybe if these critics are correct, that these movies contain stories of redemption, they can be peppered into the religious conversations Christians have with others. Jesus taught in parables; he told stories to express his teachings of his relationship to the Father, to us, to the world, to the kingdom of God, etc. Maybe we can use modern day stories that contain redemption elements in a similar fashion.

The Most Redeeming Films of 2010
For the third straight year, a Pixar flick tops our list.
posted 2/04/2011

Our film critics are not on Pixar's payroll. Nor are they getting any under-the-table perks from the animation studio. There's a much less sinister reason that a Pixar movie—in this case, Toy Story 3—tops our Most Redeeming Films list for the third consecutive year: We think their movies rock.

It's not just the astonishingly good animation. It's the phenomenal storytelling, the depth of character development, the keen insight into the human condition—even from the perspective of plastic playthings. One of our critics confesses that he cried at the end of TS3 all three times he watched it—and will likely do so the next three times. That's what Pixar films do to us.

As for what makes Woody and Buzz's final adventure so redeeming, there's plenty: The usual themes of love and loyalty run loud and clear. Toys though they may be, the friends are willing to risk their lives for one another. And their owner, Andy, now college-bound, isn't about to relegate his old playtime buddies to a box in the attic, never to be played with again—or at least for decades. Instead, he takes a selfless step in the end, giving Woody and Buzz and the rest a new lease on life—a rebirth, so to speak. It's no surprise that many of the creative types at Pixar are Christians, as they churn out soul-stirring stories year after year. (For the record, Up topped our Most Redeeming list in 2009, as did Wall-E in 2008.)

Our Most Redeeming Films of 2010 list below is precisely that—the year's best movies that include stories of redemption. Several of the films feature characters who are redeemers themselves; all have characters who experience redemption to some degree. Some are feel-good flicks; others, a little less so. Several of the films are rated R and PG-13 and are not intended for young viewers, so please use discretion. But in all of these films, redemption is certainly one of the main characters.

The Most Redeeming Films of 2010

1. Toy Story 3
Directed by Lee Unkrich
(Disney / Pixar) | Rated G

2. The King's Speech
Directed by Tom Hooper
(Weinstein) | Rated R

3. Get Low
Directed by Aaron Schneider
(Sony Pictures Classics) | Rated PG-13

4. True Grit
Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen
(Paramount) | Rated PG-13

5. Winter's Bone
Directed by Debra Granik
(Roadside Attractions) | Rated R

6. Despicable Me
Directed by Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud
(Universal) | Rated PG

7. Tangled
Directed by Nathan Greno and Byron Howard
(Disney) | Rated PG

8. The Fighter
Directed by David O. Russell
(Paramount) | Rated R

9. Letters to Father Jacob
Directed by Klaus Härö
(Olive Films) | Not Rated

10. Like Dandelion Dust
Directed by Jon Gunn
(Blue Collar Releasing) | Rated PG-13

Growing in God Apologetic

2011-02-09T12:50:00.000-08:00

I do believe that one of the greatest defenses for the Christian faith, one of the best ways for Christians to prepare to be ready to defend the faith is by growing spiritually and maturing in Christ. This growth comes through worship!

The following is a high school devotion which my wife shared with me today:

Laugh Out Loud
And nine other ways to worship all summer long.
by Chris Lutes

1) Help and serve others. Play ball with the neighbor kid. Help out with your church's summer VBS or a neighborhood Bible club. Mow an elderly neighbor's lawn for free. And whenever possible, do your serving in secret so that God gets the glory (1 Peter 4:11). Just look around you and you're sure to discover simple, everyday ways to worship through serving others.

2) Sit down in your yard with your Bible and pick a blade of grass. Turn to Isaiah 40:7-8, which says: "The grass withers and the flowers fall. … Surely the people are grass. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the Word of our God stands forever" (NIV). Read the passage a few times, then think about what it means to you. Use the blade of grass to bookmark the passage. Read the passage periodically throughout the summer, watching as the blade of grass withers.

3) Take a walk in a park or forest with a friend. Look around at all of the things God has created. Take turns pointing out how God's creation gives you glimpses into his character and nature. For example: "God is like this oak tree because he's sturdy and strong."

4) Take pictures on your family vacation that remind you of your Creator and his awesome creation. Place these pictures on your blog or in a scrapbook, and label each one with a passage that fits the picture. Throughout the summer, look at the pictures and praise God for the beauty of creation he showed you during your vacation. Here are some passages to get you started: Genesis 1:11-12, Psalm 19:1, Psalm 29:3, Psalm 65:9, Psalm 84:3, Psalm 93:3-4, Psalm 96:11-12, Psalm 97:2, Psalm 98:8, Psalm 104:7-8, Psalm 104:10-11, Psalm 104:12, Psalm 104:20, Psalm 104:25, Psalm 147:4, Psalm 148:3, Psalm 148:7, Romans 8:19, Colossians 3:16.

5) Toss a rock into a lake on a still, windless day. Watch the ripples roll outward. Try to count them. Now think about God's love. How is it like those ripples? How can you be a "ripple of God's love" today?

6) Laugh. Whether you're at an amusement park, forest preserve, city park, miniature golf course or the beach, listen for joyous laughter. Each time you hear someone laugh, take a moment to silently thank God for the gift of laughter. And be sure to celebrate by laughing often just like the writer of Psalm 126:2.

7) Find a quiet place to watch the sunset. As you watch the sun sink beneath the horizon, sit very still and think about your day. Recall the good and the bad moments. Thank God for being with you throughout everything that happened that day. Thank God for being present with you during these quiet moments.

8) Thank God and praise him for the ability to run, throw, kick, swim—or whatever it is you do to work out or participate in a summer sport. Try to stay aware of his presence with you each time you play or exercise.

9) Start each day of your summer job right with this verse: "Whatever work you do, do it with all your heart. Do it for the Lord and not for men" (Colossians 3:23, NLV). Memorize this verse and then recite it before you begin your shift, repeating it during times of frustration, and repeat it again at that end of your shift.

10) Plan small group worship services around a backyard fire pit. Sing praise songs, read Scripture, pray and share stories about Christ working in your life. This is a great and informal way to keep your Christian friendships tight, even if your youth group doesn't meet during the summer.

This devotion comes from Christianity Today.

The Office of Pastor in a Congregation

2011-02-08T08:26:00.000-08:00

We had a quote from Luther during the "Sunday School" time at church this last Sunday. We were discussing the "office of the public ministry" and "the office of the keys". If you'd like to know more about those terms please go to www.lcms.org and I'm sure you'll be able to find what the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod's teaching position is on these two terms.

Martin Luther

Here is the quote from Luther, however the quote wasn't cited in our "class" so I'm not sure what work it can be found:

If we hold the Word of God in high regard, then we would be glad to go to church, to listen to the sermon and to pay attention. But if you look more at the pastor than at God; if you do not see God's person but merely gape to see whether the pastor is learned and skilled, whether the pastor has good diction, then you do not have eyes to see the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb...

I believe that this quote from Luther certainly shows the common day tendency for churches to center themselves around the pastor and not on Christ! I know that when a pastor dies or leaves his "office" some churches struggle greatly. I think that error arises from the problem that Luther mentions and also from the pastor taking on too many roles in the Body of Christ!

Pastors today seem called upon to do everything in the Body of the Christ within a congregation. Why is it the pastor always (in most congregations) delivers the Word of God from the "pulpit" on Sundays? Why is it that the pastor often times always leads the public prayers? Why is it that the pastor often times leads "Sunday School"? Why is it that the pastor has to be at all the board meetings and financial meetings? Why is it that the pastor in a lot of churches is supposed to sit in the office from 9-5? Who does that help? Don't most people work during those hours? Why is the pastor the one to always visit the shut-ins and and those in the hospital? Why is the pastor the one to always baptize and distribute communion if the efficacy of these sacraments lies in the Word of God and not the pastor? In some churches, the pastor is also the musician who leads worship too! Why do so many hats fall on the pastor when everyone in a local congregation has spiritual gifts to offer the body? I think this is one reason that so many pastors burn-out in the ministry. They're taking roles that other body parts should be doing!

When you read 1 Cor. 14 you find that everyone has a song to share, a prayer to offer, a word to share, and that all of this must be done for the mutual benefit of the body. In this same chapter it talks about multiple people prophesying (proclaiming God's Word) in the congregational gatherings. Also read Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12.

The problem I see is much bigger than what Luther says it is. It's not that we make the mistake of gathering to glean from the pastor and not from God; we also make the mistake of going to glean just from the pastor alone! Our services set us up to be judgmental of the pastor! Our gatherings are like going to see movies or lectures. Everyone faces forward in one direction and for large parts of the service listen and are not allowed to have free interaction with what is being said; in fact "no talking during church!" How many times have you heard that, or been told that?

We should not only look to the pastor as God's representative, seeing that the river of the water of life is flowing from God to us through him, but that we should also look to our left and right, and see that everyone in the congregation is also God's representative and has a vital role in the wellspring of the church.

If we do this, we will decentralize from the pastor and center on Christ.

If we do this, we will defend against pastor burn-out.

If we do this, we won't have to worry about the absence of a pastor or the leaving of a pastor. Although, if we do this and begin to utilize the gifts of more people during our gatherings and during our church activities then the replacing pastor might have a problem because he might not be the one opening up the pot-luck with prayer and if he does he might not be the only one to verbally offer up a prayer to the Lord.

Mormon Chat with Carl Popy #1

2011-02-07T07:33:00.000-08:00

A friend of mine who sets up shop with me at the University of California Irvine is very dedicated to sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ with Mormons. He is very knowledgeable in what they believe and interacts with them regularly. He has made his way onto their "list", so every couple of months the Mormon Church will send a couple of new missionaries to speak to him. I asked him if he could share some of the information he has gleaned from speaking with them in terms of how best for a Christian to approach a Mormon. I thought if we knew what to say them and how they would respond it would be helpful and encourage other Christians to become more proactive in reaching out to the Mormons.

My friend writing under the pen name Carl Popy, for Polycarp, went to www.Mormon.org where anyone can chat with a Mormon missionary. The following is a transcribed conversation he had with a Mormon.

Welcome to Mormon.org chat.
A representative will be with you shortly.
Agent [Kollin] is ready to assist you.
Kollin: Hello, my name is Kollin.How may I help you?
Me: I have some questions about Joseph Smith and scripture
Kollin: ok
Me: I understand that Joseph Smith received revelation restoring the Bible
Kollin: Ok
Me: Is that right?
Kollin: Yes. He was commanded to go through the Bible and make corrections to it.
Me: Mormons believe that the Bible is corrupted and Joseph Smith restored it?
Kollin: No, just that parts where taken out and lost over time.
Me: and that is known as the King James Version?
Kollin: He 're' translated the King James Version, yes
Me: what is the re translated KJV called?
Kollin: We just refer to it as the inspired version of the Bible.
Me: So do you use the KJV or the inspired?
Kollin: We use the KJV
Me: Why would you use a corrupted Bible when you have the inspired one?
Kollin: I wouldn't use the word corrupted...we don't have the copyright to the inspired version, that is owned by a breakoff from our church.
Me: So your church doesn't have the inspired word of God?
Kollin: Not currently.
Me: What is this breakoff church called?
Kollin: They used to be the Restored Church of Jesus Christ, but they where bought out by another church, and I don't know the new name
Me: So, what keeps you in this church, and not the one with the inspired word of God?
Kollin: Just because they have the copyright, doesn't make them right.
Me: What does make one right?
Kollin: Truth
Me: I thought Truth and the inspired word of God were synonomous
Kollin: Carl what is it that you are really getting at here?
Me: I'm investigating the LDS church and am confused. They claim to be the one true church, but do not have the inspired Word of God.
Kollin: Not currently.
Kollin: That doesn't make us any less true
Me: How do I know that the breakoff that has the inspired Word of God isn't the one true church?
Me: What makes them less true?
Kollin: There is only one way that you are going to figure out if either one is true, and that is through prayer
Agent [Kollin] has left the chat.

Here are the comments which Carl Popy gave to this chat:

It's nothing too deep, but you see how the Mormon handled my questions. I think it kind of highlights how differently we see things. Generally, I think, we (orthodox) Christians, (perhaps especially Lutherans) hold to 'sola scriptura'. We play by those rules, and expect everyone else to as well, but they don't.

I tried to have a conversation myself. Here's how mine went:

Welcome to Mormon.org chat.

A missionary will be with you shortly.

Agent [Nate] is ready to assist you.

Me: Hi Nate.

The chat session has ended.

I don't know what happened on that one. I haven't tried it again yet. Let me know if you have any good chats with Mormon missionaries!

The Early Story

2011-02-05T10:33:00.000-08:00

I am very happy to have my first guest writer, Shelby Cade, on the OC Apologist's blog.

Shelby has a Master's in Christian Apologetics (with highest honors) from Biola University. He has taught science at the high school level for over 20 years and has taught at the college level as well. Currently he pastors a small Southern Baptist Church in NW Kansas and works as a school counselor. He also is a certified apologetics instructor for the North American Mission Board. The name of his blog, "Flatland Apologetics" is derived from the fact that he lives in the high plains area of Northwest Kansas. Check out his blog when you have the chance.

The post he has written fits in line with some of the latest posts I've had on the historical reliability of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. I hope it's helpful.

The Early Story

Many times those skeptical of the resurrection of Jesus will attack the New Testament as a mythological story. However, the resurrection can withstand the attacks, because the New Testament is not absolutely necessary to show that the resurrection is the most likely story.

There are certain passages that are referred to as creeds. These creeds represent known stories that stand outside of the New Testament documents. In other words, creeds are stories that no one would question as being a latter invention. Creeds appear earlier that the actual writings of the New Testament and represent the news flashes of what people were saying early on. Early creedal passages were never debated by those of the first century. In other words, individuals of the first century who may have been skeptical of Christianity never questioned the creedal statements that existed.

One such creed that existed early on is found in 1 Corinthians 15: 3-8. This creedal passage comes by way of the apostle Paul. This passage may have been written some 30 years after the death of Jesus, but the story itself goes all the way back to the resurrection itself. This passage was not some story written down some 30 years after the fact. Most scholars accept this story as being very early, showing that the resurrection of Jesus was proclaimed very early as well. The late Jack Kent who authored the skeptical book, The Psychological Origins of the Resurrection Myth even says, “the creed might have been in circulation for some years and it could be dated very close to the actual crucifixion.” [1] The First Corinthians creedal passage shows that the resurrection story was not an invention of men or myth.

Implied in the story are the death, burial, resurrection, and appearances of Jesus to others. If nothing had been written concerning the person of Jesus, one would still need to explain this apparent miracle. Jesus was a known person who suffered death on a Roman cross, which no scholar would debate. Jesus was placed in a known empty tomb according to the majority of scholars and was reported to be alive after three days in the tomb. For the skeptic, it is incumbent that he/she offers explanations of the empty tomb and appearances of the risen Jesus. The New Testament is constantly attacked, but if Christianity is to be proven false, then a better explanation to the implied First Corinthians creed must be offered. The early story of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus has stood the test of time and confirmed the reason for the early spread of Christianity.

By Shelby Cade

Shelby's blog: "Flatland Apologetics"

Shelby Cade

[1] Kent, Jack, The Psychological Origins of the Resurrection Myth, p. 16-17

Click for more info.

Circular Argument Against the Bible

2011-02-04T12:33:00.000-08:00

Christians sometimes fall into the peril of arguing in a circle to justify that the Bible is the Word of God. An example of this would be: "The Bible is the Word of God. I know it is the Word of God because the Bible says it is the Word of God. Therefore the Bible is the Word of God." I have certainly made this argument before in my life. I was never taught any different or learned any better until I was about 21 years old. I firmly believe however that I still had saving faith, because our faith isn't dependent upon our arguments for our faith.

I think however there are just as many people who reject the Bible as the Word of God commit a circular argument error as do Christians. An example of this comes from an argument which Professor Avrum Stroll made in his discussion of the existence of Jesus:

“Even if there were reason to believe some of the material [in the Gospels] to express eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ life, the accretion of legend, the description of miracles performed by Jesus, which exist in these writings make it difficult, if not impossible, to extract from them any reliable historical testimony about the events described."*

Avrum Stroll, P.h.d.

Clearly he is doing the same thing that Christians have on occasion been accused of doing, arguing in a circle. Here is how Stroll's argument looks in simpler wording:

· - The Gospels can’t be true, because they say Jesus

is God. Miracles are impossible!

· - The Gospels must be rejected as myth because of
this.

- The Gospels are myths because of miracles!

And we have come full circle.

Click the image to learn more.

* Avrum quote pulled from History and Christianity
by John Warwick Montgomery. John Warwick Montgomery is the man! This book is great. Check it out in its full glory in History, Law and Christianity.

John Warwick Montgomery

Aaron Rodgers and Christ

2011-02-02T08:30:00.000-08:00

I received this from our campus pastor at Crean Lutheran High School. I have no idea where he copied this from, but I thought it'd be nice to post to the blog this week (for obvious reasons), even though it is not necessarily apologetics related. The quote at the end by Saint Francis of Assisi could be apologetics related. And for the record, I root generally root for defense, so I am in full support of the Steelers because Troy Polamalu is a favorite player of mine, if I had to pick one (I don't really follow football).

Ed and Darla Rodgers raised their kids in a Christian home. Their life in Chico, California was centered around church, family, and sports. Ed, a local chiropractor, credits his wife for helping to raise their three sons in a proper way. “My boys are humble,” he said to a local paper, “and that’s what makes us most proud.”

This Sunday, middle son, Aaron, will be on display with that humility, as he leads the Green Bay Packers in Super Bowl XLV against the Pittsburgh Steelers. In the Green Bay lockerroom, coaches and teammates know all about Aaron Rodgers leadership and quarterback skills. His arm strength has been described as “ridiculous.” His uncanny ability to find receivers and get the ball to them has made him the NFL all time career leader in passer rating at 98.4. But they also see the character that was developed at an early age.

“I grew up knowing what a stable relationship was by my parents example, and how it centered on Christ,” Rodgers says. “When our family had its ups and downs, I knew my parents relied on God for everything, and he always got us through the rough spots.” Until he was 17, Aaron says he went to church because his parents went to church. But about this time, he began to make some choices with his buddies that he knew were not right. It was then he rededicated his life to the Lord. “Ever since then,” he says, “I fall on my face and get back up, get on my knees and confess, and keep on trying to live for Jesus.”

This would also describe his play. No one can question his toughness. After two concussions this year, Rodgers came back to lead the Packers to their first NFC championship since 1998. It hasn’t been an easy road for Rodgers. After three years as a backup quarterback, he was called on to take the place of the legendary Brett Favre, who had been the starting QB for the Pack since 1992. His steady play was largely overshadowed by Favre’s “unretirement” and subsequent trade to the New York Jets.

Rodgers is used to being overlooked. After a fine high school career at Pleasant Valley High School, in Chico, he got exactly one Division 1 offer, and decided, instead, to go 30 miles down the road and play for Butte Community College in Oroville, CA, Here he led the the team to a 10-1 record and a #2 national ranking. After one year, he signed to play for the University of California, leading them to a #5 national ranking in 2004. In the 2005 NFL draft, the Packers made him their #1 pick overall.

As a Christian, Aaron is a solid individual, but as one teammate said, “He will not stand on the bleachers and shout.” In fact, Aaron often quotes St. Francis of Assisi, who said, “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary, use words.” He often quotes his favorite Bible passage of Psalm 91:1-2. It reads “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the Lord, ‘He is my refuge and my fortress, my God in whom I trust.’”

He may need that and more this Sunday night as he faces the onslaught of Troy Polamalu and the Steeler defense. But when it is all said and done, and the Lombardi trophy, named after the former Green Bay coach, is handed out to someone, Aaron Rodgers will walk away exemplifying the example of both his earthly and his heavenly Father. “I try to live my life in a way that reflects the Lord, he says. “I use that as a model as I relate to my friends and family, my teammates and coaches. I want them to see that I really love and care for them as individuals. I try to build relationships. I feel if you are not personally invested in the people you spend every day with, then you are missing out on building a relationship and wonderful life experiences. This is what I like about Jesus. Jesus is about relationships.” And you can be sure that somewhere in that massive stadium on Sunday night, Ed and Darla, and Luke and Jordan Rodgers will be proud of Aaron not just for what he does, but for who he is.

Historical Reliability of the Gospels #2

2011-01-31T21:00:00.000-08:00

The following is an outline of what I consider to be the key sections of an apologetic for the trustworthiness of the Gospels by Kenneth Samples from his book, Without a Doubt. I encourage you to read this book. It answers 20 difficult questions of the Christian faith.

Chapter 7:Important Information Part II

Are the Gospels Myth or Fact?

1. The Gospels and the external sources that support them were written so closely to the events that they historically record; there isn’t enough time available for myths to have crept into their accounts.

· Jesus’ death – 30 to 33 AD

· The Synoptic Gospels (Matt, Mark, and Luke) – existed by the early 60’s

· This evidenced by the lack of important events that occurred later, such as the destruction of the Temple (70 AD), martyrdom of Paul, James, or Peter, or persecution under Nero.

2. The Gospels as myths is only plausible if several generations existed in-between the death of Jesus and the time they were written down.

· Legends can’t replace facts so long as eyewitnesses remain alive.

3. The Apostles recognized the difference between myth and fact and because of this they made efforts to make claim that what they were writing as fact!

· Luke 1:1-4

· John 19:35

· 1 Cor 15:3-8

· The Gospels are in the canon because they emerged from within the apostolic circle.

4. There were other witnesses, both friend and foe, who could have refuted false claims. Nothing refutes or contradicts the claims of the Gospels. The Apostles even called upon the testimony of others to be checked (Acts 2:22, Acts 26:25-27)

5. The Gospels are not written like Greek mythology.

· The miracles in Greek mythology are bizarre and frivolous

· The miracles of Christ are always put into context of His ministry!

6. The arguments for rejecting the Gospel claims are circular.

· The Gospels can’t be true, because they say Jesus is God. Miracles are impossible!

· The Gospels must be rejected as myth because of this.

· The Gospels are myths because of miracles!

· And we’ve come full circle.

Seeing God?

2011-01-30T08:59:00.000-08:00

We had a message about the sinfulness and dangers of horoscopes, Ouija boards, palm-reading, physics, and the like in chapel this week. It was a tag-teamed message, and one of the teachers speaking grew up in Venezuela where people commonly participated in such occultist fortune-telling practices. He shared how such activities "open the door" to spiritual world and how he and his family experienced this on several occasions ministering to people who were demon-possessed or demon-oppressed by such dabbling in the occult.

Some students after chapel shared that they didn't believe in any of that non-sense. Their reason was that they hadn't seen it or experienced it themselves! Their basis of truth is purely subjective.

Isn't that the case with a lot of people and God. I can't believe in a God I can't see. If he really wanted me to believe he'd make it more clear. Just like the apostle Thomas - I need to see, I need to touch.

But can you see gravity? Can you see magnetic fields? Can you see electricity flowing through a wire? Can you see the wind? Can you musical notes? No! You can see their effects though. This is true with God. We can't see him, but we know he exists through his creation.

Not everything in life can be experienced by all five senses. It's a big error to put almighty God into a certain category that requires him to be seen to be real.

However, in the person of Jesus Christ, God took on flesh and he was seen and touched. God revealed himself and did make himself known in history through Jesus. We of course haven't seen him in the 21st century, but we can investigate the truth claims about Jesus found in the Bible just as we would any other truth claims from other texts concerning historical figures in ancient history.

Historical Reliability of the Gospels #1

2011-01-29T21:17:00.000-08:00

Click image to learn more about Without a Doubt.

Without a Doubt by Kenneth Samples

Key Points from Chapter 7 Part 1: Historical Reliability of The Gospels

The Christian faith depends on the historical nature and accuracy of the unique claims, character, and credentials of Jesus Christ! – Page 91

Read 1 Corinthians 15:12-18. Christianity hinges on the resurrection of Christ.

Support for the Historical Reliability of the Gospels

1. The New Testament documents are the best attested documents of antiquity in terms of total number of manuscripts.

· Check out this website: http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/bib-docu.html

· 5,000 individual Greek Manuscripts

· 8,000 copies of the Latin vulgate

· Without these there are still thousands of manuscripts from commentaries and sermons that can be used to piece together the entire New Testament and these are from the early church fathers in the second to fifth centuries. – Page 92

· Textual criticism exists because of the Bible.

2. The interval of time between the date of the original authorship and the date of the earliest New Testament manuscript copies is extremely short.

T The historic statements made about Jesus by ancient non-Christian authors for the most part matches well with the Gospel record.

· He was a provocative teacher, a wise and virtuous man from the region of Judea.

· He reportedly performed miracles and made prophetic claims.

· The Jewish leaders condemned him for acts of sorcery and apostasy.

· He was crucified by Pontius Pilate at the time of the Jewish Passover, and during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius.

· Jesus’ followers reported that he had risen from the dead.

· The Christian faith spread to Rome were the Christians were persecuted and tried for crimes.

· First-century Christians worshipped Jesus Christ as God and celebrated the Eucharist in their services.

· Even though these Romans ridiculed the Christians as being morally weak, they were often times known for their courage and virtue.

4. The authors of the four Gospels were eyewitnesses of Jesus’ life themselves, or were closely associated with the eyewitnesses.

John 19:1-4
1 John 1:1-2
Luke 1:1-4
Galatians 1:11-12
2 Peter 1:16

5. The Gospel writers intended to convey factual and historical information and the writings of their historical content have been confirmed to a significant degree.

6. The apostles’ testimony becomes more credible when it is considered that they had nothing to gain from it and everything to lose.

· They received no monetary reward or power from their message.

· They received only beatings, imprisonment, and death.

· Adversaries could have exposed their message as a lie, but they couldn’t.

· We can trust their message because they had no motif to lie or deceive.

· If they did lie and deceive they violated everything Jesus taught about honesty and truth.

Apologetics Mp3 - Refuting Zeitgeist

2011-01-22T16:38:00.000-08:00

I copied the following text and image from Apologetics 315:

If you have heard of or watched the online conspiracy-theory movie Zeitgeist, then this audio file may be helpful in dissecting just how deceptive and incorrect it is. In this audio file, Glenn Peoples unpacks and refutes many of the movie's false claims and errors. A good audio file to point people to who may have questions. This audio is from Glenn's "Say Hello to My Little Friend" podcast, found here. Blog here.

Full MP3 Audio here (55 min)

_______________________________________________________________

In the film Zeitgeist, the narrator claims that there are many gods before Jesus who were "solo Messiahs" who died and rose again on the third day. One such god was the Son god of Egypt. Many people are making such assertions that Christians simply copied the myths of previous gods and applied them to Jesus.

I saw one such argument made by Dr. Bart Erhman in a debate against Dr. William Lane Craig. Sadly Bart didn't having any quotes from other qualified men to back up this claim, and People's points out in this audio file that the narrator of Zeitgeist, never quotes anyone and never interviews any historians. He simply throws out claims and they are never supported by research. The narrator of Zeitgeist also dismisses any and all sources for the historical Jesus by non-Christians in and near the first century in a few sentences. In this audio Glenn Peoples does a good job of playing clips from Zeitgeist and then provides sound refutation to those Zeitgeist bits.

I'd recommend this audio clip for your commute to work. I don't think you could find something better to listen to on Christian talk radio, besides the Frank Pastore Show, of course.

Full MP3 Audio here (55 min)

What I Have Learned from Henry Rollins #1

2011-01-20T19:08:00.000-08:00

I firmly believe that Christians should know the people they are sharing their faith with, and by this, I don't mean a solid relationship is necessary. I mean that Christians should have a clue about the person's cultural background, hobbies, interests, and enjoyments. Paul in Acts 17, mingled in the marketplace and he learned and observed the people of Athens. When they asked him to share his beliefs on the resurrection, he was able to connect with some of them by quoting their own poets, making references to a good aspect of their current worship, and also was able to directly address their current philosophy.

I love that Paul didn't just quote the Bible with the men of Athens. In fact, he didn't quote the Bible at all. He just quoted their own poets!

I love to watch movies and listen to music to hear the poets of the world, to learn from them, and inevitably I get something back from them that actually benefits my Christian faith. I also learn more about how to communicate with others my beliefs through the current culture.

Henry Rollins - Photo taken from here.

A favorite singer of mine (if you'd call him that, I do, and he's so much more btw, such as an author, actor, and TV host), Henry Rollins, has taught me a lot. He has a heart for helping others and he is also brutally honest, and calls things the way he sees them. I want to share with you some of what I have learned from Henry which I like to use when sharing my Christian faith with others.

From an album he released called, Weighting, comes the following lyrics from "Miles Jam #3":

I want to see all the straight lines go crooked
So I know they’re real
I want to see you screw up
So I know you’re real
I want to see you bleed
So I know you’re there
I want to see you fall
So I know you’re human
Cause everything is too slick, too bright
The lines are too straight
It’s too right
Nothing ever fails
I need you to remind me of your mortality
I need you to remind me of my mortality
I want to see the colors fade
I want to see the shine fall away
I want to see a mistake
I want to see a mistake
I want to see a great fault or catastrophe
Because it’s too straight, it’s too slick, it’s too right
I want to see the cracks
I want to see the fault lines
I’m tired of hearing the word causality
They should just say . . . death.
I’m tired of hearing the word virus
They should just say. . . plague.
Because the life’s are too smooth too easy.
They don’t use the word failure enough
Cause everything’s not alright, and I’m tired of being strung along.
And in my weaker moments, I almost believe it.

What I love from these lyrics is the call to truth. Things in this life are not peachy, perfect! Humanity makes an attempt at hiding the pain, problems, suffering, and death. Individuals make an attempt to appear perfect, so they can be accepted and loved by all! We wear mask to conceal our flaws. And you are not allowed to point out the faults, because then you'd be the problem. Especially, in today's politically correct environment, no one is a failure anymore.

Rollins, an atheist (from all that I have heard and read from his own words), sees through the facade and calls for honesty. As a Christian, I have to applaud him and I take this to heart in my life witnessing for the God I believe to be real and true. How often do Christians show their faults? How often do people who are not Christians get hit over the head with the law, being called a sinner in need of grace before the Christian takes the time to know what the person already believes about himself or herself! What if, what if, they already know they're broken, know they need help? Heaping more law and brokenness on a person in that situation won't be helpful.

Listening to Rollins, I see that he wants honesty. I ask myself how honest are many church congregations, or Christians, with their sinfulness. To an outsider looking at the church, what would they see? Would they see that the church is a bunch skewed lines acting as if they are straight? Do they see humble, repentant people?

I just read from Death by Church by Mike Erre:

"I think He [God] hasn't given up on us, His church. I think He is calling us to reexamine some things and reshuffle some priorities, but more importantly, He is calling us to wake up. To not just point to our shiny, happy megachurches and Christian bookstores and tell ourselves all is well. Sometimes I wonder what would happen if we really started addressing the things that plague the church - things like pride, infatuation with power and influence, narcissism, idolatry, greed, envy, and hypocrisy."

Reading these words from Mike Erre, made me think about Rollins' words, "Everything is too slick, too bright. The lines are too straight. It’s too right." Do Rollins' words apply to the church, just like Mike's words? Rollins sees through the smoke and the mirrors designed to hid the faults; he sees the cover-up, and what he really wants is to see the real you, the real me.

So for Christians what can we take from this? I take that for some people who are not Christians what they really need to see his open honesty. They know their mortality, they know their faults. They don't need us just to jump into the conversation saying they have problems and they need God. They want to see us admit and bare our problems and our vulnerability. Besides, the Christians are called to do this, to bring sin into the light. We need to be messy in the church, and I don't just mean a generic confession of sin at the start of a sermon. Hypocrisy is a big claim against the church by non-Christians, and I don't think the problem is really hypocrisy, just a lack of admitting our own faults and the ways we as a church of hurt and burned others.

As a Christian apologetic, our first defense, in some cases, might need to be simply apologizing for our misrepresentation of Christ and for hiding our sinfulness as if we were sinless and had no problems ourselves.

There's a great chapter in Blue Like Jazz that shows this apologizing apologetic put into action.

Mike Erre also writes an entire chapter on this approach in Death by Church called "Jesus Wept: Apologies and Apologetics".

And of course I must add a link to the Rollins Band CD Weighting, which contains the jam I quoted. I'll have to warn you though, it's not his best CD. It's certainly a release that is best for fans of Rollins.

Penn and the Bible

2011-01-15T13:01:00.000-08:00

Warning - There is vulgar language in the following video.

The reason I posted this video is to show how extremely against the Bible Penn is.

Now that you see how strongly Penn opposes the Bible, now watch this video.

Here's the main section of the video that really hit home to me.

If you truly believe that Jesus is God, that he died for the sins of the world, and that he rose from the dead, for the salvation of all mankind, that his works beat sin, death, and the devil, then how much must you hate a person to not want to share that news with him or her? Powerful words from an atheist indeed. I certainly share this with others after having seen this video. Whenever, I share my Christian faith now, I usually mention that because I believe this to be true, I am compelled to share it.

I think sometimes we avoid sharing it because of our own pride. We don't want people to hate us. It's not that we just don't want to make others socially awkward, we don't want to be socially awkward ourselves. It comes down to a fear of man problem. Penn certainly brings it home! If you truly believe that there is a heaven and a hell, you must share that with others! How could you not?

Karma and God? ... And LeBron James?

2011-01-12T10:11:00.000-08:00

I pulled the following from a Yahoo! Sports' blog called, "Ball Don't Lie":

LeBron James, Mixing Karma with God

LeBron [James] apparently doesn't feel much sympathy for his old team in these troublesome times. In the closing minutes of the Cavs game, with the only issue left to determine being whether or not the Lakers would double-up the Cavs, Cleveland's former savior Tweeted about karma, hate, and divine retribution. Here is what he said:
Crazy. Karma is a b****.. Gets you every time. Its not good to wish bad on anybody. God sees everything!

I think it's very interesting how Karma is thrown around so much today in society.

Sharon Stone claimed that Karma was the reason that the Sichuan earthquake happened. She claimed that China was getting what they deserved for atrocities and human rights that had occurred and still continue to occur within the country.

What disturbs me more is the mixing of Karma, initially a solely Hindu belief, with other religions.

Jason Lee, Scientologist

One example of this comes from, What About Earl, a television show completely centered a dude trying to shake the chains of bad, Karma. The actor who plays Earl, Jason Lee, is a scientologist. This of course wouldn't necessarily mean that there is a mixing of religions, since he is in fact just an actor and the character he plays wouldn't necessarily have to represent his own personal beliefs. However, I know if I was playing a character in a show about Karma, I would make clear statements that I don't belief in the idea of Karma, and in fact, I'd have to pass on such an ongoing role if I was an actor, because it would conflict with my Christian beliefs and I wouldn't want to lead others astray.

LeBron, in this quote, is clearly mixing religions. I read online that he is Roman Catholic, so why is he referring to Karma? Why are we mixing religions? Is this just another sign of religious pluralism running a muck?

I think what disturbs me most about this quote from LeBron is the clear evidence of watering down religion. Because of religious pluralism the fundamental teachings and beliefs of each religion has been hacked down to bits, to the point that universalism is possible. Terms such as Karma have been ripped from their religious meaning and origin. Karma now is strictly, people getting what they deserve, "what goes around, comes around." Karma no longer rests as a key piece to a more complex system of Hindu theology.

Frankly, it makes me sick and I want to puke (not literally, not yet).

Muslims, the Qur'an, and the Injeel #5

2011-01-08T17:54:00.000-08:00

In review, the Qur'an states that the Injeel (New Testament) is from Allah - it's the word of God! However, Muslims reject Jesus as being divine, the second person of the Trinity, and claim he is just a prophet. They also say that he never died on the cross! How can these two documents both be from God and yet be contradictory on such points? Muslims claim it is because the Injeel has been corrupted and changed!

The one response already suggested for Christians to use is the "theological" response which simply says that God is stronger than man (Luke 18:27 and Qur'an 2:148). God keeps his word and humans are not stronger than God to be able to change it.

The second response already suggested for Christians to use is the "logical" response. It simply asks who, when, where, and how questions about the corruption of the Injeel. Muslims don't generally have any answers to these questions, so it certainly gets them thinking. Following this line of questioning, a Christian can also propose how do you know the Qur'an hasn't been corrupted too?

And the third response...

__________________________________________________________________________

The Historical Response

I personally like the historical response given here: "Is the Bible Trustworthy?".

The "historical" response provided by Crescent Projecct, a Christian orginzation dedicated to helping Christians build relationships with Muslims, presents the historical response through three stages.

The first stage is the Eyewitness Stage (AD 1-100)

Jesus was crucified 33 AD and raised from the dead.
There were eyewitnesses who lived during this time, both friend and foe who could have discredited the Gospel writers if their information was not accurate and correct. There isn't such documentation.
We can trust the Injeel to be historically accurate since it was written by eyewitnesses and directly based on the accounts of eyewitnesses.
There are no eyewitnesses of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus alive at 100 AD.

The second stage is the Persecution Stage (AD 100-325)

The Romans decreed to martyr Christians and burn their books.
We however have found partial manuscripts from this time period.
We also have letters and writings from early Church fathers.
We also have early translations of the Injeel.
Since the Christians in this time period were under persecution, we can trust that since they were willing to die for what the believed from the Injeel that they made every effort to accurately copy and preserve its message for future generations and themselves.

The third stage is the Translation Stage (325 AD-Present)

325 AD - Codex Sinaiticus - A complete copy of the Injeel.
350 AD - Codex Vaticanus - AD 400 Codex Alexandrinus - other complete copies.
All translations of the Injeel that we have today are based on the Greek partial manuscripts from the Persecution Stage and the other full copies from the Translation Stage.
The message is one and the meaning has not been changed.
There were copies prior to Muhhammad in 570 AD, and Muhammad instructs Muslims to believe and read the Injeel as part of being a Muslim.
Clearly, Muhammad thought the Injeel at his time in history had not been corrupted or changed! The historical evidence shows that it definitely has not been changed after Muhammad's lifetime.

What if Starbucks Marketed Like a Church?

2011-01-05T17:33:00.000-08:00

I think that this video does a great job of revealing how inappropriate, confusing, and unwelcoming many local church congregations can be not only for visitors who may or may not be Christians, but also for many Christians who even regularly attend a local church congregation's gatherings and services.

Let me ask you a couple of questions and I'd love to hear feedback:

Do you relate to this video at all?
Have you experienced anything similar at the church you currently attend or have attended?
Do you think this video is just completely out of line? If so, why?
What could and should be different in church gatherings, if anything at all?

I personally think this video does a good job of showing that relationships need to be more important in church community. Relationships need to be built and fostered. I think it also shows that for the current moment, the way most churches function and operate, sharing the Christian faith doesn't need to revolve around, "Hey, do you want to come to church with me?"

2010-12-30T10:59:00.001-08:00

Happy New Year's!

Religious Pluralism #2

2010-12-29T08:42:00.000-08:00

Religious pluralism, which I'll define as the view that all religions are equally true and valid, is for most people, deeply rooted in the idea that truth is relative. Truth is dependent upon a matter of perspective. This makes truth subjective and not objective, which makes it so one religion can't be exclusively correct. If I think Christianity is true, then it's true for me. If a Muslim believes the Qur'an's teachings are true, then it's true for that individual. Ultimately, this means everyone's religious view is true for the individual. I could not tell someone that their religious view is wrong.

Here's a problem with this line of thinking. Two plus two equals four. That's true a statement, and since it is true it is true for all people, at all times, and in all places. Even if I think two plus two equals five, and that's my perspective, I will be wrong because two plus two never equals five for anyone, anytime, anywhere. If it is true that Hu JinTao is president in China right now, then it's true for everyone, everywhere, in all situations. Truth, extends to everyone, and it is not changed on account of someone's personal view! This applies to religion!

Another example, I am a male! Regardless of your view or perspective, I am a man, and my wife is a woman.

Applying this principle, that truth extends to all, to religious pluralism, Jesus either is God (Christianity), or Jesus is not God (Judaism, Islam), or Jesus is one with the divine source that is at the heart of all things (Hinduism), or Jesus was just a dude (Buddhism).

Living Loud: Defending Your Faith contains a chapter entitled, "What is truth?", which speaks more in depth on this issue of relative truth. Click on the image of the book to get your copy of it today.

Muslims, the Qur'an, and the Injeel #4

2010-12-28T09:54:00.000-08:00

The Qur'an says that the Injeel (Muslim's Arabic name for the New Testament) is the word of Allah. They however, say that it's been changed, or corrupted, which is why Allah had to send the Qur'an through Muhhammed. It's also why many of them haven't read the Injeel. So how can a Christian respond to a Muslim who says, "Yes, the Injeel is the word of God and Jesus was a prophet, but it has been changed!"?


My wife with a Chinese Muslim who owned the Muslim restaurant in the background. We regularly ate here for a couple of years.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Logical Response

Simply ask questions.

"When was the Injeel (NT) corruptued?"

"How was it been corrupted?"

"Who corrupted it?"

"What parts are corrupted? Has the whole Injeel been changed?"

Muslims generally won't have answers to these questions.

You can then ask,"Did Muhammad tell Muslims to read the Bible in the Qur'an? Did he say it was the word of Allah in the Qur'an?" The answers to these questions are yes, and if you want check the first post in this series and you'll see the verses from Qur'an which claim this.

The next statement to follow up the answer to these questions is, "If Muhammad said to read the Bible and didn't make any mention of it being changed or corrupted, then it must have been changed after Muhammad."

That then leads into the "Historical Response" which shows that the Bible hasn't been changed before or after Muhammad.

Muslims, the Qur'an, and the Injeel #3

2010-12-26T08:50:00.000-08:00

This series has shown where the Qur'an states that the the Gospel of Jesus, the Injeel (the Arabic name Muslims use for the New Testament) is from Allah. This is phenomenal! From the authoritative word of Allah for Muslims, there is the direct teaching that not only Jesus but other prophets from the Old Testament delivered the word of God to humanity. It has also been shared in this series that Muslims believe that Allah has revealed his word in succession as previous scriptures were distorted, corrupted, or changed by men. The differing understandings and views that Muslims and Christians have concerning the Injeel (NT) has also been shared. To read the rest of this series scroll down, or click on the Islam label at the bottom of this post.

__________________________________________________________________________

Theological Response

One response to a Christian apologist could give to Muslims for why the Injeel has not been corrupted is a theological response.

When Muslims say the Injeel has bee corrupted, Fouad Masri, founder of Crescent Project, suggests saying, "Astaghfurallah"! This means, "God forbid."

Why should this response be given? It would appear that such a response is instantly setting up a fight, using the name of Allah and throwing it back in a Muslims face that he or she is WRONG! In fact, this is done from a loving position. Muslims say "God Forbid" whenever something is said or done that goes against Allah or his will. The idea is that Christians apologists should respond with "God Forbid" to direct them to the truth that what they just said went against God's word, because it suggests that humans are stronger than God.

From a theological study of the Qur'an, who is stronger, man or God? Clearly God. From a theological study of the Qur'an is the Injeel (NT), from Allah and his word? The answer is yes. It then stands to reason, if they were God’s words when they were written down, how could man have the power to change them? If man can corrupt God’s word, how do you know then if the Qu’ran can’t be corrupted. God will save and protect his word.

At this point a Christian can encourage a Muslim to know that in the Injeel God has promised to keep his word. Encourage a Muslim to read the Injeel. Copies of the New Testament can even be purchased which have the title "Injeel" on the cover and they are written in both Arabic and English. It would be the perfect time to share the Injeel with a Muslim, ensuring him or her that God's word cannot be corrupted, because God will preserve his word - man is not stronger than God.

Many Muslims have not read the Injeel, because they have always been told that it is corrupted! They are taught that it is corrupted because it clearly contradicts what the Qur'an teaches. Yet, the Qur'an says the Injeel is the word of Allah. Christians must begin to interact with Muslims to show them that the Qur'an mandates that the Injeel be kept and read and that it came before the Qur'an and God's word cannot be changed by men, since God is stronger than men and God has promised to keep his word. Once Muslims begin to read the Injeel, in the view that it is the word of God and can be trusted, they will learn what the Injeel's teachings about God and the prophets runs contrary to that of the Qur'an, and if they were in fact reading it as God's word that came before the Qur'an then in hope they will see the Qur'an for what it truly is, the word of a man.

Buy Copies of the New Testament Injeel

in English - Arabic (Click the Link Below):

THE NEW TESTAMENT INJEEL ENGLISH-ARABIC

Luke's Christmas Narrative

2010-12-25T09:46:00.000-08:00

Merry Christmas!

The Christmas narrative copied from www.biblegateway.com, the New Intervational Version 2010:

Luke 2

The Birth of Jesus

¹ In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. ² (This was the first census that took place while^[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) ³ And everyone went to their own town to register.⁴ So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. ⁵ He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. ⁶ While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, ⁷ and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

⁸ And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. ⁹ An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. ¹⁰ But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. ¹¹ Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. ¹² This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

¹³ Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,

¹⁴ “Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

¹⁵ When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.”

¹⁶ So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger. ¹⁷ When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, ¹⁸ and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. ¹⁹ But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. ²⁰ The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things they had heard and seen, which were just as they had been told.

²¹ On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise the child, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he was conceived.

Muslims, the Qur'an, and the Injeel #2

2010-12-21T10:58:00.000-08:00


Bridges: Christians Connecting with Muslimsis a DVD small group study by Crescent Project. Click the image to learn more!

The first post in this series showed verses from the Qur'an that teach that the Injeel (the Arabic name Muslims use for the New Testament) is revelation given to us by Allah and that Muslims are called to believe in it. There are blatant contradictions between what is taught within the Qur'an and the Injeel (NT). Muslims handle these contradictions by saying, "The Injeel has been corrupted, and the Qur'an has replaced the Injeel." There are several responses that a Christian could give to Muslims who say this.

____________________________________________________________________________

Books which Muslims recognize to be from Allah are first the Torah (the books of Moses), the Psalms of David, the Gospel of Jesus (Injeel, NT), and the Qur'an. For more information on the books that Muslims believe to be revealed from God go to Islam Uncovered, a site written by Muslims.

Muslims believe that Allah sent the Torah (Tawrat, Arabic name), but that the Torah was changed. Because of this change, Allah sent the Zabur (the Psalms of David). These were also changed, so God sent Jesus and his Gospel revealed in the Injeel. The Injeel was also changed, so Allah sent the Qur'an, given to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel.

Islamic Understanding

Muslims truly believe that Allah's word was handed down in phases to mankind after each revelation had been corrupted.

Muslims believe that the Qur'an will not be corrupted, since Allah will protect His word.

Muslims will say that the Injeel has gone through many versions and that the real one cannot be found.

They say that Christians have changed many of the stories in the Torah, the Psalms of David, and the Injeel. For instance, Muslims say that Jesus never died on the cross. It was either someone else or an apparition who appeared to be Jesus. This means that Jesus never died, he just ascended into heaven. They also say that Ismael was the promised son to Abraham, not Isaac, and that Abraham was asked to sacrifice Ismael.

Christian Understanding

The Injeel is the word of God. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

God will keep his word.

There are not many versions of the Injeel (NT). Instead, there are many translations. Some translations contain the word "version" in their title which helps lead to this confusion. Scholars have gone to great lengths to study the original Koine Greek to make accurate translations that truly represent the original text and language. The many translations when compared, maintain the one message. A problem that arises from this with Muslims is that they believe the only authoritative text of the Qur'an is in Arabic, and when they pray to Allah they must pray in Arabic, even if they don't know or understand Arabic.

Now that these two different perspectives on the nature of the Injeel have been presented the next posts will share three approaches, or responses, a Christian may take to encourage a Muslim to read the Injeel.

For more information read:

Is the Injeel Corrupted? My Search for the Truth About the New Testament

Muslims, the Qur'an, and the Injeel #1

2010-12-20T19:00:00.000-08:00

A Muslim Noodle Shop (LaMian Dian) in Hangzhou, China.
In China, it is very common to see Muslim run
noodle shops throughout the country.

The Islamic creed, when spoken in faith, makes someone a Muslim. This creed is "There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger."

The Qur'an, which means recitation, is the message Muhammad received from Allah.

The Injeel is the Arabic name given to what Christians call the New Testament.

_____________________________________________________________________________

From looking at the Islamic creed, one would assume that Muslims reject the Injeel (NT) to be the word of God, since Muhammad is the messenger of the one and only God, Allah.

This however is not the case according to what is written in the Qur'an...

Qur'an 2:136 - "Say ye: 'We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah."

Qur'an 3:2-3 - "God! There is no god but He, - the Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal. It is He who sent down to thee, in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Jesus."

Qur'an 5:82 -"You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews and those who associate others with Allah ; and you will find the nearest of them in affection to the believers those who say, "We are Christians." That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant."

Qur'an 5:46-47 "And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous. And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient."

Qur'an quotes taken from Sahih International from http://quran.com.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The Qur'an clearly defines the Injeel (NT) to be the word of Allah. Muslims teach that Jesus was a prophet of Allah. If you ask if a prophet speaks the word of God, they would say yes. Clearly, this brings up a problem because the Injeel records Jesus referring to himself as God and his followers teaching others that he is God.

So how do Muslims get around this contradiction, especially since the Injeel, confirmed by Muhammad to be the revelation of Allah, came before the the Qur'an?

Muslims claim that the Injeel has been corrupted, which is why Allah sent his word to Muhammad.

____________________________________________________________________________

Over the next several blog posts I'll explain three different responses a Christian apologist can give to the Islamic claim that the Injeel has been corrupted.

For More Information Check Out the Following Book:

Is the Injeel Corrupted? My Search for the Truth About the New Testament